> Sure, but this is a situation about social norms rather than passive aggressive employer behavior.
Every time I come across a thread - on any forum - where people are educating others that something is a social norm, it is because it is not. They merely want it to be.
If you have a good number of people disagreeing on it, take it as a humble suggestion that norms differ across geos, industries, culture, etc. Don't insist on it, because it will come across as an imposition.
Unrelated to the content in my comment above, I look at this from the same lens I look at products in my engineering world. We don't find a need to credit Claude Shannon, John Von Neumann, Tony Hoare, etc in all our products. I find this to be OK.
> Every time I come across a thread - on any forum - where people are educating others that something is a social norm, it is because it is not. They merely want it to be.
Saying "thank you" and giving credit to someone who did you a solid is pretty universally a norm.
> If you have a good number of people disagreeing on it, take it as a humble suggestion that norms differ across geos, industries, culture, etc.
Or, there's just the fraction of people who disregard and push back on norms.
> We don't find a need to credit Claude Shannon, John Von Neumann, Tony Hoare, etc in all our products. I find this to be OK.
It's a bit different here, in that the people you cite are titans who developed ideas that might be a portion of a work... which is a bit different from using the work wholesale. I don't think anyone would expect Amazon to thank/cite/acknowledge something they used that comprised 1% of a product... but when it reaches a very high proportion it's time to mention it.
Further, these were academics. We do have a norm of citing them when we're deeply using and building upon their work academically.
> Saying "thank you" and giving credit to someone who did you a solid is pretty universally a norm.
How much time have you spent looking for counterexamples in the society where you live? Where people do something for the common good and most consumers do not say "Thank you". Have you done this exercise?
> Or, there's just the fraction of people who disregard and push back on norms
This is a convenient, self-fulfilling narrative. It is also pitting you into an adversarial position with someone. It's highly risky to insist on a norm and accuse others of not honoring it - and then be viewed as someone who is inflexible. It's your choice, though.
> How much time have you spent looking for counterexamples in the society where you live?
I've spent a whole lot of time thinking about norms and observing their observance, enforcement, and what kinds of circumstances they tend to be disregarded. I've read a lot of the lit, too, thank you.
> This is a convenient, self-fulfilling narrative.
So is refusing to acknowledge the existence of norms because some people refuse to acknowledge them. Ultimately, our social reality is something we pretend into existence together.
> It is also pitting you into an adversarial position with someone. It's highly risky to insist on a norm and accuse others of not honoring it - and then be viewed as someone who is inflexible. It's your choice, though.
Whinging that someone broke norm A [e.g. seemed ungrateful] and thinking less of people/entities that you've heard have done the same is pretty cheap and isn't likely to earn you value judgments yourself.
> I've spent a whole lot of time thinking about norms and observing their observance, enforcement, and what kinds of circumstances they tend to be disregarded. I've read a lot of the lit, too, thank you.
Then I hope you've noticed that there are instances in society where "Saying thank you and giving credit to someone who did you a solid" is not the norm.
> So is refusing to acknowledge the existence of norms because some people refuse to acknowledge them.
We are in agreement here.
> Whinging that someone broke norm A [e.g. seemed ungrateful] and thinking less of people/entities that you've heard have done the same is pretty cheap and isn't likely to earn you value judgments yourself.
I have no idea what you're trying to say here. This sounds precisely what people are doing: Whining that Amazon seemed ungrateful and thinking less of people who do likewise. Which is orthogonal to what I'm saying.
> > > It's highly risky to insist on a norm and accuse others of not honoring it
> This sounds precisely what people are doing: Whining that Amazon seemed ungrateful and thinking less of people who do likewise.
Yup, and while there's variation in the hivemind, all in all I don't think a very large fraction of it is snapping back and thinking of the author as inflexible. So p'raps it's not so highly risky.
> Crediting the work of a project you directly forked to create your own is a social norm in the open source world.
This is merely repeating the same statement over and over ("Yes it is" "No it isn't" "Yes it is" "No it isn't" ad nauseum). It's not furthering the conversation.
That Amazon decided to do it has no bearing on whether it is a norm or not.
Every time I come across a thread - on any forum - where people are educating others that something is a social norm, it is because it is not. They merely want it to be.
If you have a good number of people disagreeing on it, take it as a humble suggestion that norms differ across geos, industries, culture, etc. Don't insist on it, because it will come across as an imposition.
Unrelated to the content in my comment above, I look at this from the same lens I look at products in my engineering world. We don't find a need to credit Claude Shannon, John Von Neumann, Tony Hoare, etc in all our products. I find this to be OK.