I use a money clip instead of a wallet. It matches my sunglasses. And I always carry a harmonica. Other than that, boring stuff... keys, fob, phone, earbuds, bank card, credit card, identification, lighter, cigarettes, and sometimes a cigar cutter.
The problem boils down to Ego. If you've got one, then you're the problem.
The manager who wants to be treated with respect beyond that due their role is just as bad as the employee who wants to be treated with respect beyond their role.
Are you managing people, or projects?
I think the problem is, modern managers are expected to herd cats.
The problem isn't the managers, it's the cats.
The do retire. Think big picture for a minute?
I am. I believe in annullment of non fruitful unions. Fuck who you like, cohabitate as you like, but make marriage about nurturing families has ALWAYS been my position. I came to this position when my tasks as a life insurance agent/financial planner led me to help rich DINKs pay less taxes using marriage laws, and felt strongly enough about it to change careers.
My position may not be to your liking, but it is still based on logical long term social best interests as I see them, and not extremism or prejudice.
Having a system that supports the creation and nurturing of the next generation of mankind is in the long term best interests of homosexuals just as much as anyone else. Corrupting it into something purely based on decadent sex is not wise. For anyone.
Elite doesn't mean anything without context. You've determined that playing well with others is the context, so, those who do play well with others are elite, and the rest crap.
You're incapable of creating an inclusive community. They require acceptance of all.
He wasn't a genius, he was a figurehead for a popular opinion of the time.
Understanding that is key to preventing a repeat. For reasons that made sense to them, they chose him because he said "Let's get those fuckers" and they reacted eagerly.
You sure sound like an elitist...
This is the kind of binary thinking from programmers that erodes the nascent relationships among well-meaning human beings. Your ignorant approach is neither an "Uncomfortable Truth" or a useful concept. Often the most obstreperous person can be the most productive, but they must be carefully taught in social graces. Even elementary schools have learned that "Everyone work alone!" is not a useful model; the best schools now bring along the slower (or more socially inept) students through consistent and persistent group activity. Only autocrats refuse to work on building viable, productive teams in which a disparate members each contribute in their own ways, but in accordance with a common "culture" of mutual respect.
So, the people who are in pain and reflexively lash out at others...
The people who are screwed up socially and offend others without knowing what they're doing...
The people who have no where to turn and no community to welcome them...
You will turn those people away because they're not playing well with others, because they ruin the "peace, love and pancakes" "viable, productive team" kind of atmosphere that you're going for.
And then, you will pat yourself on the back for being welcoming and inclusive?
No. You just have a different definition of what "elite" means.
If you want a welcoming, inclusive community, you don't get to decide certain elements don't belong and remove them.
If you want to do that, you don't really want a welcoming, inclusive community, what you want is a community of elite according to a set of standards.
So, decide what it is you're choice will be and focus in on it, then everything will become obvious.
Sorry, you don't get to redefine science as "Something a scientist told me."
There is no shortage of people willing to make statements in the authoritative tone, and the stupid and undisciplined accept that as a way to avoid that uncomfortable feeling of uncertainty. I'm not among them, are you?
If it's not transparent and reproducible, it's not a proposal based on science, but authority. It holds as much weight as a statement by the Flying Spagetti Monster.
If you want a faith based approach to law making, just be forthright about it. It's not like you're alone. But, please don't denigrate the scientific process by claiming that's not what's happening. People are thick enough already...
If I'm the only one who can unlock your encrypted communications, then it's in my best interest to have everyone encrypt their communications, because then, I'll be the only one with total situation awareness.
It won't be in any of your interests, of course, because you'll be handing me my advantage on a silver platter... but you're all far too shortsighted to pay attention to such things.
Of course Obama and the NSA want you all using strong encryption. Stupid of you to give them what they want, though.
Wormholes have never been observed in nature.
Therefore, there is no science behind them. There is only faith.