Bel's thoughts
Ok. Thank you very much Lucio, I'll do as you suggest.
Seems I'm still inclined to reading things in a negative way, hope that will stop soon.
From your analysis I also understand "let me know" is not always tasking, as I instead thought and dealt with so far.
Quote from Bel on October 13, 2022, 1:41 pmFrom your analysis I also understand "let me know" is not always tasking, as I instead thought and dealt with so far.
Well, it is a form of tasking, but it's on the softer end, and in that case, it was tasking you to take the lead and direct his own behavior.
Much different than a form of tasking such as, say, "review and send back" or "make sure everything adds up" or "please do X".
Quote from Bel on October 13, 2022, 1:41 pmOk. Thank you very much Lucio, I'll do as you suggest.
Seems I'm still inclined to reading things in a negative way, hope that will stop soon.
I am the same way sometimes Bel. There are times people say things and I can misread it as "telling me to do something" tasking behaviour, when it fact it's the case here where it's like "take the lead and kindly let me know" tasking, which is of course power-giving in nature. Thankyou Lucio for elaborating on this, that tasking can be of different natures.
Personally for me, It's definitely some internal work I need to do as I think it is a history of the old me projecting false perceptions onto the current times I'm in, as I used to be on the receiving end of value-taking behaviour, and now that I'm transformed, some of that "old" programming from years ago is still there.
Just letting you know I'm also going through the same things sometimes Bel, and we keep learning 🙂
And thank you for the note, underdogexceptional!
It's super helpful to know what are some common sticking points -and this seems to be a common one indeed-.
The issue with being in a (fake predatory) relationship with real dark triads (ie those 1 in 10 people who are incredibly dangerous and manipulative) is that they do many things that are:
- identical to things normal people inadvertently do;
- but done intentionally and willingly with the objective to harm and destroy;
- while masking them under the "inadvertent" fake label.
Not to mention they are incredible at playing the victim, and will likely portray a situation in which they need your "help" from other people who are treating them "bad".
Just one single significant relationship with a psychopath or narcissist, especially if close, is enough to destroy a person's common sociable behavior and make him incapable of living in society. Not to talk about the risks to one's career, business, family.
Because when a close relative, or a boss, or a fake friend, does countless little things to deliberately harm you, you come to (unconsciously) think that everyone doing the same things is bullshitting and harming you. And you isolate. And you become unable to function. And lose the capacity to even acknowledge a genuine compliment.
Add to this that these people only abuse specific targets, while maintaining a public facade of goodness with all others, and it's also incredibly rare for a mark to be able to be validated by even a single friend about the truth of what happened.
The common scenario, instead, is that everyone around the mark will simply think the psychopath is a great (maybe just a bit "socially incompetent") person, and that the mark is going crazy. This is so common even in families where one single person is a narcissist or psychopath, go figure in outside life.
It's so imperative to identify these assholes and fight on a balanced plane, and then remove them from one's life for good.
"I should have done more": power move?
I connected with a former distant childhood "friend" (who was quite controlling at the time, and now is a lawyer) on LinkedIn, and he accepted my connection and confirmed two of my "skills".
I then confirmed all his skills (6 or 7), then sent him this message:
Me: Hi X! Great to reconnect here. Thanks a lot for confirming my skills!
Him: I should have confirmed even more! Hope we can work together in the future. Talk soon
"I should have confirmed even more" feels like a power move, as it subcommunicates "I know I could, but I won't put in the effort and I'm telling it to you".
I am thinking of just not replying, but am wondering whether there is a better way of addressing.
--------------------
"I should have done more" communicates that: a) he has not done all that he could; b) I would have deserved more from him; c) he knows all of this and won't put in the effort (some form of social scalping).
How to answer: maybe communicate that:
a) he doesn't need to be too harsh on himself, he can cut himself some slack / or, it's true, he's not done all here / or, I also have not done all I could (sharing the blame);
b) I acknowledge his recognition of my merits / or, no, he is the one to deserve more from me;
c) he's a bit lazy and should work on himself / or, I know he will do it in the future.
-----------------------
Tentative answer:
Me: I should have connected sooner! Thank you, working together would be a pleasure. Talk soon
Analysis:
Me: I should have connected sooner! (sharing the blame and simultaneoulsy social scalping back in an ambiguous way just like him) Thank you (aknowledges only the good portion of his communication, ie that I deserve more; however its meaning doesn't come out, may be better to delete the "thank you"), working together would be a pleasure. (re-taking judge role) Talk soon (ending conversation on my terms)
In the context of the whole exchange:
Me: Hi X! Great to reconnect here. Thanks a lot for confirming my skills!
Him: I should have confirmed even more! Hope we can work together in the future. Talk soon
Me: I should have connected sooner, working together would be a pleasure, talk soon
Yeah, that was a power move-y answer, whether intended or not.
Your answer is OK, play the exact same back, can't go too wrong.
One could also say "no, I think you picked the right ones :)".
Which is dominant and high-power for disagreeing and breaking rapport, but it's called for, so it's ok.
Generally speaking, I wouldn't endorse skills for a simple reason:
- High power people don't really need that, since they work with their network, past clients, reputation, etc.
Hence: - The top 1% doesn't usually go around endorsing each other's skills
It's a bit like insisting to pay for a coffee or meal with wealthy people: most wealthy people don't really care who pays for what, so when one insists, it feels like they're trying too hard to gain social credits but without really giving anything because the coffee means nothing to them. In a way, it's a strange form of social scalping -we once referred to in here as "glass ceiling behavior", a new concept that needs its own article. It means that something works up to a certain level, but it becomes counterproductive at higher levels-.
However, it's wrong to think "this is what the top 1% does/doesn't do, so I can do the same".
Instead, behavior that is not common to the top 1% can be appropriate or even effective on the way there.
So up to you whether you think it makes sense for you to endorse, or not.
And if I had to endorse, I'd pick a couple that stand out for me about a person, rather than doing them all, which feels more like a favor you're doing to someone, or that you like someone, rather than you critically acknowledging what one excels at.
Thank you Lucio,
this is incredibly awesome and useful feedback, and really next level stuff.
I think I'll follow your feedback fully and thus also just remove the entire "skills" list from my profile. Having one does subcommunicate being "looking for useless recognition".
Funny thing is, in the past I did exactly what you said, ie pick two or three when I endorsed other people's skills. I think I may be just trying stuff out to understand the mechanisms.
Quote from Bel on October 19, 2022, 3:16 pmI think I'll follow your feedback fully and thus also just remove the entire "skills" list from my profile. Having one does subcommunicate being "looking for useless recognition".
Yeah, I think it's a good idea.
That section screams of useless recognition, as you say.
And it's too easy to game that system: you just need to endorse others a lot.
So if you got many upvotes, most power-aware folks know it doesn't really say you have a certain skill, but that you probably wasted too much time endorsing random folks.
Alternatively, that one is so popular that people use that easy way of giving to kiss up to him -but then, he probably wouldn't need that section, and keeping it there feels like no-added value bragging-.
Here's a manipulative technique my former boss would often use against me:
- invading my office room's privacy and my personal space
He would invite other people in the firm to have conversations with him about their own stuff in front of me while I was working, often on a tight deadline on something he had given me.
He would start speaking with someone else in the corridor, then invite this person to enter with him into my room, then the two would stay in my room and talk loudly and at lenght about something I was not involved on in front of me.
While I initially was unaware of the fact that he did it on purpose, in the end as I started getting better, I started unconsciously leaving the room to go talk to someone whenever this happened.
Then he ramped it up. Every day I had three, even four or five people having loud discussions in my room.
At a certain point, when I decided to restart collaboration from the outside, I went once to his office, and he pulled it on me again.
I then decided (unconsciously) to work from my home, as I wasn't "feeling good" in the office.
After one week he asked me why I didn't "take advantage of his office", and I answered that his office was "useless", as there was more "chaos" there then in my home.
Think about a great collaboration.