Timeline for My coworker is lying about the current state of his work
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 25, 2016 at 14:01 | comment | added | Steve Bennett | I'd put it like this: continuing to maintain the presumption of good faith is safer because a) it may be true, and b) if it's not, that will be discovered and it's better for your relationship with the coworker and your reputation, with no harm done. | |
| Apr 25, 2016 at 13:55 | comment | added | Brandin | @Kevin Doing it this way is better in all cases. For example, suppose the coworker didn't actually test on those 10 machines for whatever reason. When you point out "Hey, it didn't work for me", he will have a chance to redeem himself, whether it was oversight, honest error, exagerration, etc. However if you decide to go in with charges of lying and sabotage, it almost certainly won't end well. | |
| Apr 25, 2016 at 13:43 | comment | added | Kevin | @Mindwin Ironically, all answers here assume OP is jumping the gun and assuming things that aren't proven even though it could very well be that OP has investigated enough to draw the conclusion he did, since he mentioned checking logs etc... | |
| Apr 25, 2016 at 13:06 | comment | added | Mindwin Remember Monica | The path of least assumptions is almost always the safer one, and almost always the right one to take. Razor it. | |
| Apr 25, 2016 at 9:59 | history | answered | Gediminas | CC BY-SA 3.0 |