this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2023
882 points (96.1% liked)

News

23408 readers
5378 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Citation required.

https://fortune.com/2023/08/03/remote-workers-less-productive-research/ https://www.npr.org/2023/08/04/1192246138/the-evidence-on-remote-work-is-changing https://time.com/6294640/remote-work-winning/

The question being asked is that can the work be done from home, sufficiently.

It's unlikely that many companies are going to be okay with their labor costs going up 10-20% due to less productive workers, so it is effectively the question being asked.

Also, that’s usually a technique used by those who want to redirect the narrative, by throwing over verbose amounts of text out there, so that people turn away from the conversation being talked about.

We're talking around 550 words here, taking less than 2 minutes to read for the typical adult. The idea that this was done with ulterior motive to overwhelm people with words cracks me up.

[–] CosmicCleric 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

From the article:

BARRERO: It's anywhere up to a negative 10% effect on productivity.

I think Corporate America can handle up to 10% productivity hit for the welfare and happiness of their employees. The work will still get done.

The question being asked is that can the work be done from home, sufficiently.

It’s unlikely that many companies are going to be okay with their labor costs going up 10-20% due to less productive workers, so it is effectively the question being asked.

No, its not.

You keep moving the goal posts.

We’re talking around 550 words here, taking less than 2 minutes to read for the typical adult.

The comparison is done in relation to all other comments that are posted and their lenghts, not your one comment.

You passed the threshold of verboseness that would turn people off from continuing to read, regardless of the word count.

Also, different age groups can be reading these comments, not just adults.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think Corporate America can handle up to 10% productivity hit for the welfare and happiness of their employees. The work will still get done.

Ultimately I agree. I explicitly said that we need to stop pretending that it's better in all ways, and that we need to have an honest discussion to balance the needs of the individual with productivity.

You keep moving the goal posts.

Disagreed.

Also I love how you spent more time complaining about the length of my post than actually making a point.

If you want thoughtless black and white sound bites, I'm probably not the type of person you want to be having discussions with.

[–] CosmicCleric 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also I love how you spent more time complaining about the length of my post than actually making a point.

Oh I've made points, you've just been ignoring them, causing me to have to repeat myself to make my point.

If you want thoughtless black and white sound bites, I’m probably not the type of person you want to be having discussions with.

I want intellectually honest conversations with real human beings. I don't have to agree with them, but I don't want to be wasting my time either.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh I’ve made points, you’ve just been ignoring them, causing me to have to repeat myself to make my point.

lol. No one said you didn't make a point. And I certainly did not ignore them. Only that you dedicated far more of your post to whining about post length.

I want intellectually honest conversations with real human beings.

I can see from some of your other responses in here, including to me, that this is your go-to. It's nothing more than an empty ad hominem to avoid actually addressing points. Sorry.

[–] CosmicCleric 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I can see from some of your other responses in here, including to me, that this is your go-to. It’s nothing more than an empty ad hominem to avoid actually addressing points. Sorry.

You are dancing around like crazy. Every point I bring up, instead of you discussing it, you move on to something else about me, trying to kill the messenger.

If you're being intellectually honest, and if you actually have read some of my other posts, you'd see it's definitely not an ad hominem, it's actually what I believe in, so I express it often.

I hate shills and bots, and corporations trying to redirect the narrative away from the truth to serve their own selfish needs, polluting the conversation.

And when I see shills doing that, by signaling via some of their tells, I call them on it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Every point I bring up, instead of you discussing it,

Name the point I ignored. I'm happy to address the point.

If you’re being intellectually honest, and if you actually have read some of my other posts, you’d see it’s definitely not an ad hominem, it’s actually what I believe in, so I express it often.

Whether you believe it or not doesn't change the fact that it's, quite literally, an ad hominem. You might not realize it and it's just a defense mechanism to avoid facing the fact that you can't really defend your position. But it still is exactly that.

And when I see shills doing that, by signaling via some of their tells, I call them on it.

Correction: when you can't actually defend your position, you just throw that out so you don't actually have to defend your position.

[–] CosmicCleric 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Name the point I ignored. I’m happy to address the point.

Honestly, at this point, I'd have to just point you back up to my first reply to your comment. You've moved the goalposts several times from when we started discussing WFH for employees (and not companies).


You are using multiple argumentative techniques to not have to concede a point, and not being intellectually honest in this conversation. We've drifted FAR away from the original topic of WFH.

At this point, I'd rather not waste any more of my time on this, but just instead point you back to our first comments and have you take a look at the like/dislike ratios, they are telling (though I'm sure you're ignore/excuse those away as well).

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Honestly, at this point, I’d have to just point you back up to my first reply to your comment. You’ve moved the goalposts several times from when we started discussing WFH for employees (and not companies).

When given an opportunity to make your point, you offer up nothing but vagueness. You see what you hate in yourself in me, but I assure you you are really just seeing yourself.

Also lol @ "like ratios" proving correctness.

[–] CosmicCleric 1 points 1 year ago

You see what you hate in yourself in me, but I assure you you are really just seeing yourself.

Lol!

Whatever lets you sleep at night. Have a good day.