Skip to content
Tech News
← Back to articles

Set the Line Before It's Crossed

read original get Smart Home Security Camera → more articles
Why This Matters

This article emphasizes the importance of clearly defining boundaries in policies and behaviors to prevent the gradual erosion of standards, which can lead to serious consequences. For the tech industry, establishing explicit lines helps foster ethical practices, accountability, and user trust, especially as technology evolves rapidly. Consumers benefit from clearer expectations and safer interactions when organizations proactively set and enforce these boundaries.

Key Takeaways

Lines Will Move Further Away If They Aren’t Defined

Three types of lines exist in the policy and behavior sense:

Soft: These are okay to cross, but not preferable. There may or may not be a tangible action taken afterwards, but the person whose line was crossed should take note.

Firm: These are somewhere between soft and hard lines and should result in some tangible action being taken that is less drastic than the hard line.

Hard: These are not okay to cross and (should) result in some tangible action being taken that is more drastic than the firm line.

Most lines are rarely set and rarely thought about in detail. Most line setters use the good ol’ “I know it when I see it” test, waiting for something to happen before they decide what to do. This is a poor practice because of the pernicious force known as normalization of deviance.

When lines aren’t set before they’re crossed, it forces a decision to be made at the time of crossing (if it can even be recognized that something was crossed!), during which many things can happen:

The line setter convinces themselves that the line wasn’t really crossed and everything is fine. This will land the setter in not-so-nice territory if this occurs enough times because the line effectively moves back each time. Ex: Ruben, Lou’s boyfriend, playfully pinches her, then playfully punches her, then seriously pinches her, then seriously punches her, and so on. Each time she convinces herself that her domestic abuse line wasn’t crossed, ultimately leading to her getting full-on abused.

The line setter acknowledges the line was crossed, but because taking action is uncomfortable at the time of crossing, vows to wait until it happens a second time because the first time may have been a one-off. This increases the likelihood they give a third chance to the offense when/if they apply the same thought process to the second. Ex: Diane blatantly lies and talks about Joe both behind his back and to his face. Joe explains away the behavior as Diane having a stressful time and continues being “friends”. Diane continues the behavior while Joe accepts and normalizes it as Diane’s personality. Joe’s self-esteem decreases as he continues to spend time with Diane.

The line setter acknowledges the line was crossed, but convinces themselves that the line really should’ve been just a teeny bit further when they originally set it. Ex: Harlan’s original salary threshold for taking the Giving What We Can pledge was $100k/year, but now that he’s reached it, it feels a bit low. After all, he deserves to treat himself a bit more for all the hard work he put himself through to get to the coveted six-figure salary. Plus, he may have a baby in the next few years! And everyone knows how expensive babies are! Harlan resets his salary goal at $120k, which will be plenty when the time comes.

... continue reading