It’s not wrong though. They are offering their terms, to which you are providing a counter offer that includes your terms. Standard negotiation practice.
Not following through with the fully executed agreement is what would be dishonest.
The problem I see is that the term is a pretty exceptional one. The employer reasonably thinks you both have been talking about a full-time position.
It's like going through the whole interview process with a company that's clearly hiring in-office positions, and then only after getting an offer, telling them you will only work remotely. It would be different if it were really part of the negotiation - ie they're offering way less than your asking/current salary, and you're countering with part-time for that same salary (or other benefits) to compensate.
For retail transactions we have bait-and-switch laws which address the same type of issue.
Personally I'd be pissed at whoever wasted my time like that, and wouldn't hire them based on the ethics they're displaying. If they brought it up during the interview process - even as just something they're looking for - I'd respect the fact that they gave me the option of considering it as part of the evaluation, giving me the option to clarify and end the process early if it just wouldn't work for the employer.
This is something I couldn't put into words but that was part of my thinking process. I personally would feel really bad if I knowingly hid this crucial bit of information during the process and then made it my requirement.
Maybe in some other work culture you have to be sneaky if you want a part-time job. Here in Finland I'd expect at least one third of IT companies to happily allow 80% time if you just bring it up.
No. Close the chat app if you don't want to be interrupted.
Don’t impose your personal communication preferences to others.
There are far to many languages, cultures and personalities to think that you know better how to chat than someone else. Be nice and take time to communicate with your colleagues.
My “alternative” to rm is to use mv directly. I just mv files aside whenever I am not 100% confident they are safe/ready to delete permanently.
Personally I’m not a fan of shell environment customizations like this because they are often fragile and may vary between systems. I like to know exactly what commands I’m executing.
> Personally I’m not a fan of shell environment customizations like this because they are often fragile and may vary between systems.
True. I gave up the practice entirely many years ago for a slightly different reason -- I need to use many different systems on a regular basis, and don't want to get used to using something custom that won't exist on random system X without customizing it, too.
Often, I prefer predictability and stability over convenience.
Out of curiosity how is one of two stick shakers activated obvious when each is connected to a different person? Is it common to ask “hey, is your stick shaker going too?” it seems possible that each pilot would assume the other was feelig the same feedback from the stick and go on troubleshooting elsewhere, but I have no experience with this.
Out of curiosity how is one of two stick shakers activated obvious when each is connected to a different person?
Stick shakers are noisy, but I suppose you would also ask and cross check the instruments. If only one stick shaker goes off you'll probably get various "something disagrees" lights going off, which should prompt you to check. Take this for instance:
Not following through with the fully executed agreement is what would be dishonest.