Unfortunately it's this attitude which perpetuates those kinds of actions. Of course it never starts off that way, it starts off as just wanting to protect yourself from harm, but you can eventually justify just about anything with the argument that its necessary for your "survival" (not literal survival, of course, but you get the idea).

"If I don't exploit this person's kindness now, I'll fall behind those who do and they'll use that leverage against me" gives you some idea

Actually everyone starts off kind. That many people ends up that way speaks to the core of the human condition.

>Actually everyone starts off kind

You only need to hang around toddlers or teens for less than a day to realize people do not start off kind.

People start off egocentric. Unaware or unable to take in to account the people around them are individuals with conflicting wants to you. Also unaware that we are egocentric BUT with social instinct built in to us: if we are surrounded by miserable people, or people angry at us, we don't feel good either.

So we learn that kindness, while sometimes initially painful or less opportunistic, in the long term leads to satisfaction.

Sorry, by "it doesnt start off that way" I didn't mean that people don't start off kind, I meant that people don't start off excusing exploitation

How so? Babies will bite their mothers trying to get food - it's instinctive, but it's not kind. Kindness needs to be taught despite any natural propensity towards it.

I think this is a cynical take-- you can be kind without being a doormat.

It's a very difficult balance to strike imo. People do take niceness and humor as signs that you're not quite as "professional". Of course, other people don't make this mistake, but we don't live in a vacuum - sometimes the jellybrains have control over our promotions.

The difficulty is why it requires intelligence to achieve. It is easy to be mean, and easy to be kind to your own detriment. Being kind while still thriving yourself takes thought.

That's because niceness and humor are often just a mask for being unsure, inconcise, or at worst plain unkind. Being kind is much harder, it requires thoroughly judging the situation, including considering own interests, and then responding in a genuine manner.

I think people are confusing what kindness means here.

It’s not about not protecting yourself against abuse but rather not taking advantage of people.

Being kind doesn’t mean you can’t compete or strategize but rather don’t cheat if you do.

Compassion and acts of charity is kindness.

“Do not mistake my kindness for weakness.” is a handy mantra to help avoid that.

That's a rationalization ... a justification for being unkind. Kind people simply don't say such things.

If you are so smart, why are people taking advantage of you?

See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym4Rpd72tq8

On the other hand, your feelings don't exist in a vacuum, disconnected from your external state. If you genuinely feel taken advantage of, no amount of self-delusion is going to make you truly over it, until you acknowledge the source of it, and take steps to protect yourself against it in the future.

Very easy to over-extend stoicism to your own detriment, physically and mentally.

I really hate that you’re downvoted here - it’s a sad truth, too many in this world are here to “get the bag” and will do this to you. Over and over.

Especially people in this forum. Tech is a magnet for these types.

I'm pleased that such a cynical rationalization for not being a good person was downvoted.

It's the sad reality of the society we live in. Money matters the most. Nothing else.

Kind people always get taken advantage of at work. Others take credit and then left abandoned once there's no more value to the company. I guess that's just capitalism.

You need to move into a different industry/society. These things are not ubiquitous.

Agreed. We call those people assholes. We try our best to avoid hiring those people and we weed them out of our company as fast as possible if they're discovered. We also try to have as flat a structure as possible so nobody is taking credit for anyone else's work and ideally many of us are working together so we all share the glory or frustration when something goes well or not.

I do think the flat hierarchy thing is commendable for many reasons.

That said, don't think that just because you (try to) have few bosses that there isn't some form of hierarchy in which people don't take credit for other people's work.

Sure, maybe there's no boss by title that people suck up to and take credit for stuff to look good to them. But there very definitely will be the "alphas" in the group that everyone looks up to and wants to look good to and the taking credit for stuff will be done to impress those people.

So, if you weed out this kind of stuff successfully well enough, again, I commend you. But I doubt it's as complete as you may want to think. It's just a different looking game of favours and sucking up to with less easily visible (can't just look at title to figure out who to suck up to) lines.

For some people this will be positive as they're good at figuring out who to suck up to in that situation while others may need the title to figure that out. I bet many socially awkward / socially less aware people find it easier to navigate titles they can read in an org chart than sniffing these out of the "sociosphere".

There is no society where this doesn't happen.

Never has a colleague taken credit for the work I've done. On the contrary, often in demos and other presentations they've thanked or acknowledged my support even when they didn't need to if they were the driver. I know the world can be harsh but my work life experience gives me no reason at all to be cynical.