The single most important thing is integrity. Going back to the dawn of humanity, integrity is the most important ideal. Reputation among peers.
I'll critique certain platforms and technologies dispassionately. When I brutally talk about the Fed, for example, I have no grudge against Jerome Powell as a human being. He's not doing a bad job for the situation he's in; it's the institution and the technology around it that's corrupt, not him as a person necessarily. To the minor extent that he is fair game to get meme'd as its figurehead, it's because he chose to participate as its leader. But I meme him in a way that is not negative towards him personally, and mostly just funny. I imagine Powell laughing if he sees any of my memes of him. I view him as neutral, so I neither attack nor defend.
When a high-integrity person succeeds, I'll quickly shout it out to support them. If they fail, I'll assess what happened and likely support their next thing, within reason. Business is hard, but people with high integrity get multiple shots.
When a low-integrity person succeeds, which is usually but not always through unscrupulous means, I'll acknowledge it but inspect it to see where the shortcomings were and broadcast them. To the extent that they become apparent, I'll point them out. When it comes to success, truth is important, and so those that try to succeed without truth are worthy of criticism.
In 20,000 tweets, I've been polite to everyone except maybe five people at most, and I stand by being impolite to those handful. On the other end of the spectrum, there are plenty of people who I disagree with at times, but who I view as serious people with high integrity. I purposely stand down with public criticism against those types, and will be more strategic or private with any criticism that I have.
That's the benefit of integrity. You get networks, and you get support. You don't get to bend reality, but you get flexibility from your peers when things don't work out, and you get instant promotion when things work well.
I'll critique certain platforms and technologies dispassionately. When I brutally talk about the Fed, for example, I have no grudge against Jerome Powell as a human being. He's not doing a bad job for the situation he's in; it's the institution and the technology around it that's corrupt, not him as a person necessarily. To the minor extent that he is fair game to get meme'd as its figurehead, it's because he chose to participate as its leader. But I meme him in a way that is not negative towards him personally, and mostly just funny. I imagine Powell laughing if he sees any of my memes of him. I view him as neutral, so I neither attack nor defend.
When a high-integrity person succeeds, I'll quickly shout it out to support them. If they fail, I'll assess what happened and likely support their next thing, within reason. Business is hard, but people with high integrity get multiple shots.
When a low-integrity person succeeds, which is usually but not always through unscrupulous means, I'll acknowledge it but inspect it to see where the shortcomings were and broadcast them. To the extent that they become apparent, I'll point them out. When it comes to success, truth is important, and so those that try to succeed without truth are worthy of criticism.
In 20,000 tweets, I've been polite to everyone except maybe five people at most, and I stand by being impolite to those handful. On the other end of the spectrum, there are plenty of people who I disagree with at times, but who I view as serious people with high integrity. I purposely stand down with public criticism against those types, and will be more strategic or private with any criticism that I have.
That's the benefit of integrity. You get networks, and you get support. You don't get to bend reality, but you get flexibility from your peers when things don't work out, and you get instant promotion when things work well.
4656❤️160🤙245👍2💜2👏1🔥1
