read this:
parts of the paper felt situated in an idealistic world. for example, they say:
“it is possible to imagine optimal interactions at every point along the initiative continuum”.
that is not true. we know that people have genetic dispositions to behave a certain way, but a lot of the acted behaviour is influenced by context (proof: sapolsky’s twin studies) — sometimes by arbitrary factors such as weather (see hungry judge effect).
we cannot design optimal interactions (what even is optimal?), regardless of whether we’re designing for proactive or reactive interactions. we’re always going to piss people of; the goal is to piss of the least number of people (to the least amount) as possible.