Beware of Things That Seem Too Good To Be True
When an opportunity looks like pure upside with no downside, especially if someone is aggressively pushing you towards it, be skeptical. Ask yourself: why are they being so helpful?
Usually, it means either the benefits are overblown, or the drawbacks are being deliberately swept under the rug. The key takeaway is this: the person pushing it definitely stands to gain something.
My Own Experience: The Apartment Elevator Saga
I saw this play out firsthand in my old apartment complex over a plan to install elevators.
- The Beginning: It started like typical online arguments. Residents on the upper floors (2nd and higher) were shaming the 1st-floor residents, accusing them of selfishness. Elevators were going up in other buildings, but ours was stalled due to these disagreements.
- The Pause and Restart: The pandemic put everything on hold for a year. When talks resumed, the elevators in neighboring buildings had technically been “in use” for a year (though lockdowns meant few people were actually using them much).
- The 6th Floor’s Change of Heart: Suddenly, the dynamic shifted. The most vocal opponent became the resident on the 6th floor. What triggered this? An elevator in a nearby building blew the complex’s transformer, and fixing it became a bureaucratic nightmare. This completely spooked the 6th-floor resident. After all, they were paying the largest share for the installation. If the elevator was unusable or constantly breaking down, they stood to lose the most.
- The Blame Game: After the transformer incident, everyone started pointing fingers:
- Elevator Company: Claimed the building’s power infrastructure wasn’t adequate.
- Power Company: Said the increased demand required prior notification and expensive upgrades. They could only provide temporary power and told property management to handle the permanent fix.
- Property Management: Washed their hands of it, saying they hadn’t approved the installation and weren’t responsible. They pointed us to the Residents’ Committee, who had organized the initial push.
- Residents’ Committee: Said they only made the initial introductions; the actual installation and ongoing issues were up to the homeowners to negotiate and manage.
- Property Management (Again): Floated the idea of using the building’s maintenance fund? (Residents shot that down immediately: “No way, don’t even think about it!”)
- The Shock of Maintenance Costs: The now wary 6th-floor resident started digging for information. During negotiations, they discovered the annual maintenance contract could cost as much as 16,000 yuan (around $2,200 USD). The manufacturer tried to downplay it (“It usually won’t cost that much if nothing goes wrong”), but the 6th-floor resident latched onto the key point: “So, it could cost that much?” That breaks down to nearly 44 yuan a day, or almost 2 yuan per household daily. How would this be divided? Who would collect it? It became clear nobody had a workable answer.
- Deadlock and Collapse: From that point on, the 6th floor became the staunchest opponent. When the party who stands to benefit most starts leading the opposition, the project is doomed. The discussion quickly deteriorated into accusations: “You’re pushing this so hard, what kickbacks are you getting?” Once it got personal and motives were questioned, the entire initiative fell apart.
Lessons Learned: Seeing Through the Hype
Eventually, everyone saw the situation clearly:
- Installing elevators: A potentially lucrative business (for the installation companies).
- Maintaining elevators: A thankless headache with ongoing costs and responsibilities.
The promoters were enthusiastic only about the “installation” phase, trying every trick to get residents signed up and then leave them with the burden of “self-management.” Once residents understood this, the conflict wasn’t just between floors anymore. Everyone realized the primary beneficiary was the installation company. The residents united: Unless the core issues – especially maintenance, responsibility, and cost-sharing – are clearly resolved upfront, we won’t install. We could live without elevators; who knew what problems installing one would bring?
The Outcome and a Memorable Quote
In the end, our building never got an elevator before I moved out. Other buildings in the complex that did install them were still grappling with various problems. I left the residents’ group chat, so I don’t know how things ultimately turned out.
During the arguments, the 6th-floor resident said something to the Residents’ Committee that has stuck with me and proven insightful in my own work:
Your idea of ‘self-management and self-governance’ usually just means ‘nobody manages it,’ and that guarantees endless problems down the road!
Further Thoughts: Negotiation and Human Nature
This whole episode also highlighted how poorly many people understand negotiation.
- Common Misconception: Many think negotiation is about using logic to convince the other side they’re wrong. If pure logic worked, you wouldn’t need to negotiate in the first place.
- Ineffective Approach (Example: Product Manager): Imagine a product manager proposes a terrible idea you don’t want to implement. If your first instinct is to try and convince them it’s a bad idea, you’ll spend your career implementing bad ideas. Nobody likes admitting they were wrong.
- Effective Strategy (Using Human Nature): A better approach is often to pull everyone even remotely connected into the discussion. Schedule numerous meetings involving many people. Let the back-and-forth drag on. Without you needing to directly convince anyone, the sheer hassle, diffused responsibility, and lengthy process will often cause the bad idea to collapse under its own weight. This leverages basic human tendencies: avoiding trouble, shirking responsibility, and impatience with bureaucracy.
If you don’t grasp this, forget about fancy tactics. Simply sticking to the official process might be your best bet.
Dealing with Opposition and Unfairness
- Don’t Focus on “Dealing With” One Person: People often asked, “What if the 6th floor opposes it?” The goal shouldn’t be to “handle” the 6th floor. Focusing solely on silencing one opponent makes you look unreasonable to others (like the 2nd and 3rd floors) and undermines your credibility. Your aim isn’t to defeat the 6th floor, but to reveal the project’s complexities and risks to everyone.
- Facing Unreasonable Behavior: What if people are just unreasonable or ignore the rules? First, ask yourself: why can they be unreasonable while you feel obligated to be reasonable?
- If the answer is “I can be unreasonable too,” then you likely already have ways to handle it.
- If the answer is “They can be unreasonable, but I must be reasonable,” then you’re in an unequal fight. They have the advantage; you’re exposed. No strategy works perfectly when the opponent cheats. The only real solution is to find your own leverage or advantage to level the playing field. In any conflict, the first step is to strive for equality.
Practical Tactics: Exposing Problems Through Persistent Questioning
To derail a problematic project like the elevator installation, you don’t always need to be loudly oppositional. Simply focus relentlessly on the core issue of “Who is responsible?” Keep asking detailed questions in the group chat. Often, the project will unravel on its own by tapping into people’s natural tendency to prioritize their own concerns.
State Your Position: You can even start by expressing “support,” framing it as beneficial for the community, but emphasizing that crucial details need clarification for everyone’s sake.
A Barrage of Core Questions (Examples):
- Maintenance & Responsibility:
- “Who fixes the elevator if it breaks?” (Common answer: The manufacturer covers it for a few years under warranty.)
- Follow-up: “Okay, but what happens after the warranty? If it breaks then, do homeowners pay? Who organizes repairs? Who collects the money? Is the manufacturer still involved?” (Almost certainly not.)
- Hammer it home: “What if it breaks down and no one takes responsibility?” Make everyone confront this risk.
- Infrastructure & Costs:
- “What if the transformer overloads again? Who contacts the power company for upgrades? Who pays for those upgrades?”
- “Who cleans the elevator daily? Will property management do it? Is that covered by our current fees? Will they agree to take this on? If so, how much will fees increase? How will that increase be divided among residents?”
- Safety & Management:
- “Who’s responsible for fire safety inspections and compliance? If there’s an incident, who is liable?”
- “How are rights and responsibilities defined for the public space around the elevator entrance on each floor?”
- “How will revenue from potential elevator ads be distributed? If ads aren’t allowed, who removes unauthorized posters?”
- “How will you prevent electric scooters in the elevator? That’s a huge fire risk. Who installs and monitors cameras? Who manages the footage? Who provides facial recognition tech if needed?” (The elevator company won’t care, and property management won’t without extra pay.)
- “If cameras are installed, who ensures privacy regulations are followed? Who is legally responsible for the data?”
- Worst-Case Scenarios (Company Failure):
- “What if the installation company goes bankrupt mid-project? We’d be stuck with a half-finished eyesore that’s costly to remove.”
- “Even if it’s built, what if the company goes bankrupt before the warranty expires? (Don’t say it’s impossible – big companies fail.) They’re a limited liability company; who do we chase then? Even if we sue and win, what can we realistically recover?”
- “Can the company guarantee they absolutely won’t go bankrupt in the next five years?”
Stir the Pot and Sow Doubt:
- Embrace Arguments: Your goal is to surface all potential problems and make the discussion stall indefinitely.
- Share Cautionary Tales: Find news stories about “Elevator malfunctions in X complex, residents stranded,” or “Million-dollar elevator becomes useless scrap,” and share them in the group chat.
- Use the System: If proponents kick you out of the chat, complain to the Residents’ Committee or file a formal complaint (e.g., via a city hotline like 12345) citing infringement of your “right to know” (focus on information access, not voting rights). Ask: “Why are you trying so hard to keep me uninformed? What are you hiding?”
- Sow Discord (Use Carefully): If the 6th-floor resident (or another proponent) tells lower floors to “shut up if you’re not paying much,” accuse them right back: “Why are you trying to silence people? Covering something up? Planning to misuse the funds? Tens of thousands in collected money sitting in someone’s account earns interest for whom? What if they gamble it away? Why insist on collecting money upfront instead of when the job is done?”
The Core Goal: Make residents on every floor feel like “We might be the ones getting screwed here.” The 2nd and 3rd floors might have been lukewarm supporters anyway and can be easily swayed. If enough residents oppose it, the project dies. Any time money and responsibility are involved, even friendly neighborly relations can quickly break down.
Conclusion: Clarity vs. Calculation
Our building never got the elevator. It truly was because the 6th-floor resident did the math, realized the potential pitfalls, and actively backed out. No one else needed to lead the charge. I have to say, that resident was remarkably clear-headed.
However, reading other discussions makes me wonder: perhaps our 6th-floor neighbor was so clear-headed because they genuinely planned to live there long-term, not just install an elevator to flip the apartment for a higher price. Sometimes, what looks like confusion or even proactive enthusiasm might just be masking hidden calculations.