5 ms·

I think the keys here are 1. It’s not clear who wrote the note, and they didn’t leave contact info or any opening to a negotiation. If the note had said “this

I think the keys here are 1. It’s not clear who wrote the note, and they didn’t leave contact info or any opening to a negotiation. If the note had said “this AC must stay on at all times, please call 111-222-3333 with any questions - building engineer” that would’ve completely reversed the morality of story for me. But the note asserts authority by making this non-negotiable demand (which is the part that seems patronizing to me—I agree with TFA here) and doesn’t justify that authority at all, no “I’m the owner” or anything. 2. The first step of finding a compromise is knowing what everybody wants. The author of TFA didn’t seem to do that in the story, and his apparent lack of curiosity about the compressor does not reflect well, I agree, but neither does a threat from whoever wrote the note. My wild guess here is that the person who wrote the note worked in maintenance and was unhappy about the building warming and cooling and wanted a stable temperature. The resolution may well be that the author has to find a new place to do yoga, but if he’s not interested in air-conditioned yoga, and the building’s authorities aren’t interested in tenants who want the AC off, that outcome might have been inevitable anyway.

c22 1mo ago
The building's caretaker appeared to discuss the situation 5 minutes after OP disregarded the sign. I don't know that a phone number on the note would have changed anything.
- msteffen 1mo ago
  I’m just saying, to the extent that there’s a moral question here, “how unreasonable was it for the author to ignore the sign?” I think it’s a lot more reasonable if there are no alternatives given. My take on TFA was that the lesson was “adults negotiate with each other, have the confidence to reject offers, and the humility to respect when their own offers are rejected.” Quietly seething about something you’re not OK with is bad—you are responsible for representing your own interests, and expecting somebody else to anticipate your needs instead of expecting yourself to raise them is not responsible and not “adult”. Likewise, expect other people to represent their interests, and expect them to expect you to represent your interests. Now, given that framing, I’m speaking to the question: was the author acting rightly (responsibly representing his own interests) or wrongly (disrespecting the building authorities’ “rejection” of his “offer” to rent the space, contingent AC control)? I say rightly, because he had no other way to represent his interests. If there had been a number on the sign, turning the ac off instead of calling the number would have been wrong. OTOH, if the building engineer or whoever is mad that the numberless sign was ignored, well, obviously someone wanted it off (hence the sign), and you can’t expect that person to disappear. Maybe put a number on there and talk to them.

c22 1mo ago

The building's caretaker appeared to discuss the situation 5 minutes after OP disregarded the sign. I don't know that a phone number on the note would have changed anything.

msteffen 1mo ago
I’m just saying, to the extent that there’s a moral question here, “how unreasonable was it for the author to ignore the sign?” I think it’s a lot more reasonable if there are no alternatives given. My take on TFA was that the lesson was “adults negotiate with each other, have the confidence to reject offers, and the humility to respect when their own offers are rejected.” Quietly seething about something you’re not OK with is bad—you are responsible for representing your own interests, and expecting somebody else to anticipate your needs instead of expecting yourself to raise them is not responsible and not “adult”. Likewise, expect other people to represent their interests, and expect them to expect you to represent your interests. Now, given that framing, I’m speaking to the question: was the author acting rightly (responsibly representing his own interests) or wrongly (disrespecting the building authorities’ “rejection” of his “offer” to rent the space, contingent AC control)? I say rightly, because he had no other way to represent his interests. If there had been a number on the sign, turning the ac off instead of calling the number would have been wrong. OTOH, if the building engineer or whoever is mad that the numberless sign was ignored, well, obviously someone wanted it off (hence the sign), and you can’t expect that person to disappear. Maybe put a number on there and talk to them.