Anti-disparagement clauses and effect on speech

Posted Nov 11, 2024 22:05 UTC (Mon) by Wol (subscriber, #4433)
In reply to: Anti-disparagement clauses and effect on speech by kleptog
Parent article: Open Source Initiative announces Open Source AI Definition 1.0

> The thing is, I don't understand how you can get anything done if people don't say what they mean. It drives me up the wall. Things like the Anglo-EU translation guide help, but only so far. Like we had a meeting to discuss some survey results about how the business could be improved. Attendance was 50% UK/50% NL, but I think we got three words from the UK side. How on earth do you expect things to get better if you can't even bring yourself to say when something is crap?

Well, quite often I find that when I try to say something, people jump in, talk over me, and put words in my mouth that I would never ever say. Maybe that's why I say far too much here :-)

But it's quite likely that Dutch directness has a quite chilling effect on Brits - if the Dutch kept their mouths shut they might find the Brits spoke out much more. If the imbalance is really that bad in your meetings, you need to ask the Brits their opinion, and if any of your Dutch guys tries to talk over them, you tell them in no uncertain words to keep their trap shut and LISTEN, DON'T SPEAK.

Can't remember where I came across it - many many years ago - but there was a story about a board of directors called in a management consultancy to help them improve their board meetings. And a lot of the board members were quite puzzled as to the value one guy provided - "Why's he on the board, what's the point of having him". Until the consultants asked them where all the board's ideas came from, and pointed out that nearly all the board's "good ideas" came from him.

I'd seriously suggest that if the Dutch are doing all the speaking, they need to learn how to listen. Sorry.

Cheers,
Wol

Anti-disparagement clauses and effect on speech

Posted Nov 12, 2024 10:41 UTC (Tue) by taladar (subscriber, #68407) [Link] (4 responses)

It seems to me (as a German) that the UK is pretty bad at criticizing established systems in general considering how many parts of e.g. the UK political system really could do with a reform as they have recently shown severe deficiencies when someone doesn't follow some unwritten rules and yet the Brits seem to mostly be busy trying to avoid talking about those failures and necessary reform at all costs.

And I say that coming from a country that is pretty backwards itself when it comes to implementing necessary changes.

Anti-disparagement clauses and effect on speech

Posted Nov 12, 2024 12:59 UTC (Tue) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (3 responses)

Yup. I agree we could do with SOME political reform. But as an example of a seriously botched reform I'd take our referendum on Proportional Representation as an example. We were presented with a simple choice - the existing First Past The Post or, (MASQUERADING as Proportional Representation) a Single Transferable Vote.

I want PR but not STV! Which way do I vote? I want to keep our existing system, but with a proportional top-up - open ONLY to people who came second.

The snag is, the ENGLISH like to think everything dates from time immemorial and before - "Time Immemorial" being twelve hundred and something, and "before" being "1066 and all that". The Scots, Welsh and Irish would beg to differ, never mind that most of us are Britons/Welsh ...

But with the United Kingdom dominated by petty small-minded little-englanders, it's quite hard to make people look out at all these good ideas in the wider world - the NHS is a wonderful example of a sacred cow that - maybe shouldn't be shot - but deserves to be put out to pasture!

Cheers,
Wol

Anti-disparagement clauses and effect on speech

Posted Nov 12, 2024 15:05 UTC (Tue) by farnz (subscriber, #17727) [Link] (2 responses)

Note that in the case of the existing FPTP system for Westminster, "time immemorial and before" is the Representation of the People Act 1948, which is the last major change to our voting system (there have been minor changes since, like lowering the voting age and controlling election expenses, but nothing significant).

A lot of the people who feel that things "shouldn't" change don't realise just how recently they did change…

Anti-disparagement clauses and effect on speech

Posted Nov 12, 2024 16:02 UTC (Tue) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (1 responses)

"Time Immemorial" is, I believe, a legally defined term. As in "when our current legislative system was created", ie Magna Carta-ish in age. Long before 1948.

But yes, I think our current electoral system has probably only really been in existence for since "back to 1948 and the same again". When did they abolish the "rotten boroughs"? 1850-ish? and then Universal Suffrage about 1918 along with the gutting of the House of Lords?

(Or is Universal Suffrage technically the grant of the vote to all MEN over the age of 30? Again 1850-ish?)

Our modern electoral system is *mahousively* younger than Time Immemorial.

Cheers,
Wol

Anti-disparagement clauses and effect on speech

Posted Nov 12, 2024 16:52 UTC (Tue) by amacater (subscriber, #790) [Link]

In English law, "Time immemorial" == the date of the coronation of Richard 1st of England in 1189.

Anything prior is assumed to have been there for forever unless there is documentary evidence proving things one way or another. Otherwise, it's a convenient pivot date: anything before is considered true by default- "whereof the memory of man runneth not to the contrary"

[Legal history was part of my undergraduate degree]

Anti-disparagement clauses and effect on speech

Posted Nov 12, 2024 12:15 UTC (Tue) by kleptog (subscriber, #1183) [Link]

> But it's quite likely that Dutch directness has a quite chilling effect on Brits

Maybe, but it's not like they don't get the opportunity. Even when explicitly asked you get long silences. Maybe we just hire shy people. Even my manager (who is British) says this is normal for them.

Anyway, this is going quite far afield :)