Originally posted by Elroy The Great
View Post
We have an example of a place where drug laws have been greatly relaxed, and where none of the disaster you predicted has come to be - in fact it is better, not worse.
I'm not defending drug use. I pointed out that there is less drug use when you change the approach.
That's not defending it, it is trying to reduce it.
Whereas your approach makes it worse. It means more people doing drugs, and doing worse drugs.
Again, this is the problem of thinking in the terms of 'teams'. You end up doing the exact opposite of what you claim you are doing. In this instance, your approach increases drug use and makes the instances of drug use worse.
When you take action A, thinking it will improve outcome X - and then find that it does the opposite, you need to change what you are doing.
If you keep on doing action A afterwards, because it is what your team is doing, then that is the definition of insanity.
Comment