Yes, that would be your fault for MISCOMMUNICATING your expectations! Because not saying something is miscommunication! Neglecting to tell the the other family not to lock your daughter in the basement is miscommunication! Not telling them not to burn all her clothing is, you guessed it, miscommunication! They shave her head? Your fault for miscommunicating! They sell her to human traffickers? Your fault again – Miscommunication!
24 Likes
no. I told you reality instead of fictional bc that happens a lot. Also, here are the other scenarios that would happen:
- both daughters asked for haircuts from me bc i’m a stylist and I would make sure to ask you prior to doing so
- your daughter lies and tells me you said it’s ok, but then you get mad saying you never told her that
- you drop your daughter off and before you leave we talk about the potential for a makeover/makeup party to say what’s cool and what isn’t
But overall, if I’m in the hotseat then I would not do anything unless asking person because that’s the kind of person that I am. But back to the post in question, this is why I’m sticking to the miscommunication issue between the two parties
ok…you take my Poodle for a walk along with yours while i’m busy. While out, you decide to give my dog a make-over and give his head mohawk trim and …dye it purple. Because, when you picked him up, i neglected to tell you: “Please do not give my dog a makeover when you take him for a walk today.”
21 Likes
Bully for you. I worked in software development for 20 years, and I know the difference between the communication expected between clients and providers for a specific project with a definite outcome, and what happened the to OP. You are obfuscating to defend your indefensible position. It’s pretty tiresome.
31 Likes
Of course you are. Otherwise, you’d have to admit you are wrong.
19 Likes
So now you know. Everyone else in horse world agrees that nobody ever should alter a horses mane or look without the express explicit permission of the owner. It just is not done, period, by anyone who is familiar with the horse scene. Now you know if you get itchy scissors fingers at a barn. Don’t do it.
I have two barefoot horses with natural mains at a self board barn on a diet I devised for them.
How explicit do I need to be that nobody mess with my horses care? Do I need a sign on my stall door saying dont cut or pull my horses mane, tail, or whiskers; don’t clip my horse on winter; dont trim my horses hooves or get your farrier to put on shoes; do not feed my horse high sugar grain; dont due her pink and green for a kiddies birthday party etc etc etc?
No I don’t need to do this because every everyone understands you dont mess with other people’s horses.
;
21 Likes
Yet you continue to try to get my to change my position with extreme facts and not this particular scenario.
100% of the projects I work on are not A = B projects/purposes. They are all dependent on the current/future needs of the client. We have our clients alongside the development of the product so we never get 100% of the requirements up front from the clients until we start working out the issues they’re trying to fix. We usually get about 20% up front and then figure the rest out along the way
LMAO if you were the kind of person that I could pose that to and do it, that would be the coolest dog in town.
So if someone was a client 6 months ago can you walk into their office and smash up all their office chairs because hey, they never said you couldn’t?
13 Likes
I mean if you communicate to people up front that you loan your horses out to, go for it. You should never have any issues.
So you really could say for an actual example,
“What if a client comes back after 6 months of work and says the current product doesn’t meet our needs anymore. Scrap it and make us something else using these initial requirements”
I would simply have to go back to the drawing board with the team and figure out the best path to take. No need to get mad since business requirements constantly change.
Forget it. This one is dug in so deep she will never stop obfuscating, making false equivalences, and justifying her position to herself. I’m calling it a day. The ignore function is my new best friend.
25 Likes
see…u switched it again…you added in a couple of words that made it all look ok, but that is NOT how i posed the scenario. In my scenario you decided to give my dog a makeover without permission. Because you felt OK to alter my dog because i didn’t tell you not to. In real life…the not-to is implied.
so, it goes like this: i can put my own dogs in odd trims, (because they are my dogs), but you can’t, (because they are not your dogs).
9 Likes
There was no miscommunication, because there didn’t need to be communication at all.
14 Likes
Well, you’re also asking me what I would do in the situation. I communicate prior to doing anything with someone else’s stuff/animals/property. It all goes back to communication.
Ohhh have fun then. You might be that “Susie’s” next victim for lack of a communication.
1 Like
nooo. i was not asking you what you would do in the situation. I told you the situation. It was an example of overstepping boundaries…to try to make you understand that many boundaries are implied and that most people (even autistic ones!) know what they are.
10 Likes
oh I totally understand the situation without you having to create all of these other situations. It’s ALL communication. People never seem to understand that you have to effectively communicate to make sure you get what you expect out there and this just goes to show that this is what happens when people assume that things will run a certain way. This is exactly why I never assume anything anymore.
I don’t think you do understand it though. Not at all. You say it was miscommunication that the mane cuttee never told the mane cutter to not pull the mane. When in fact, there is no need to tell a person what they cannot do to other people’s property. IF it is yours, do what you want. If it is mine, you may not without permission. Trespassers do not respect this rule, nor do thieves, but i am pretty sure most of them have been taught, somewhere along the line, the difference between right and wrong.
15 Likes
I think this is the first thread in COTH history where everyone but ONE person is in full agreement?!
There was no “miscommunication”. SUSIE DID NOT HAVE PERMISSION TO HANDLE MY HORSE!!
She was loaned my horse for TWO lessons SIX months ago. It was a “one time” thing because a clinician came to the area and she had already paid. There was ZERO reason for her to touch my horse six months later and change his appearance.
If you can’t see the issue with this and think there was a “miscommunication” I worry for you. There was no miscommunication, there was a major boundary crossed! You don’t touch people’s stuff without their permission, Gone_Rabian. I cant believe you think I needed to communicate not to touch my horse six months later?! So, do you take people’s cars six months later without asking them because they let you borrow it once, and change the color to green??? It’s literally the same exact thing!
47 Likes
