This is not ideal. Some people like to project strength. Review for tone so that there is no potential for escalation, and then it is more manageable. Treat it as a process. Battle lines are drawn, and people have to decide as there will be cost to the people. Minimize such consequences for people. As our approach may be so defective that we can’t continue processing a plan. We all need to comply with uniform rules. And make every effort to comply. Also, doing our own research should be the norm. Have a hunch to validate a sound thought. Come up with a process and come up with an execution schedule. Require all to give a well-rounded and compliant strategy. It is so as if they have nothing else to do and had to jump on it. All is well that ends well: trust my judgment and trust my opinion as corner cases can be disruptive. It’s not my job to shift the burden from you to me. Outside experts are not free, so don’t hire experts that only a multi-billion organization can hire. Cannot have someone who can overrun an honest relationship between you and your family. He who knows what the deal is going to be extremely successful. Would you take advice from an assistance helpdesk and not read the rules of engagement. Not capable of doing nothing is an unlikely winner. Expressing your opinion can be convenient yet concerning. Strategic choice has to be made. It’s not my job to convince you what is good or what is not. We all have to back up our argument with something if someone pushes back. Give them something revised, and then they think they have been heard. Avoid head butting. Complying with rules should not stir up the pot. Clarity and simplicity are vague and highly subjective. For example, simplicity from whose point of view. Everybody is not the arbiter what gets done. The position is suitable if it is ok to submit your account details. Here are some things to consider. Avoid self-destrictive sphere of existence related stories, which we tell and get vilified for thriving in gray areas.