&gt; suboptimal game-theoretic strategy<p>If people were independently operating, weakly interacting game theoretical robots of very modest capacity, this might make some sense.<p>But humans are enormously complex animals evolved to live in a highly intertwined society. Critique is used for all sorts of things besides helping other people do better at their jobs. No human motivation is rational; rationality just constrains and informs action. [1] It would be an interesting world where people could just turn off social and emotional response. But it&#x27;s not the world we live in.<p>That means that people will (and should) evaluate every personal interaction in terms of what the other party&#x27;s motivations are. Is this person critiquing me because they want to help? Because they are cranky and want to lash out at somebody? Because they want to discourage me? Because they want me to change behavior they they find inconvenient or aesthetically displeasing? Etc, etc, etc.<p>That doesn&#x27;t mean they might not also later say, &quot;Well, he is an asshole, but I guess he has a point.&quot; That&#x27;s not easy and it takes work. So if I am going to take the time to tell somebody a hard truth that I really want them to hear, I might as well help do the work that lets them really hear it. If I&#x27;m not willing to do the work, I might as well just keep my mouth shut, because there&#x27;s nothing particularly rational about me taking the time to say things that people won&#x27;t listen to.<p>I get that wishing other people would be more rational seems pretty rational. But it&#x27;s an irrational stance. People are people. If I&#x27;m going to work with &#x27;em, I have to work with the actual thems, not the thems that in some ideal world would be convenient for me.<p>[1] See, e.g., <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;dp&#x2F;014303622X&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;dp&#x2F;014303622X&#x2F;</a> and a lot of other things