What Patrick McKenzie means by a “Dangerous Professional” (GPT-5-Thinking)

This is the same prompt as the previous post on this but with GPT-5-Thinking.

The “Dangerous Professional,” in Patrick McKenzie’s sense

What the archetype is

A Dangerous Professional (DP) is a competent, calm operator who knows how institutions actually work and can make them work. They’re “dangerous” (in a good way) because they produce an authoritative written record, cite rules and regulators precisely, and route problems to people and processes that are obligated to act. They’re dangerous to people who want things to stay deniable.

Core mindset and models

• Paper beats vibe. Writing things down invokes what he calls the deep magick: once something is in a contemporaneous note, email, or letter, it forces institutions into their formal state machines.
• Treat large orgs as state machines, not people. Front-line statements are often nullities; what counts is what the institution will “set forth in writing.”
• Authority judo. Know which authority can obligate which sub-org to move (e.g., cite a regulator or policy the sub-org can’t ignore).
• Shot clocks exist. Many processes (Reg E disputes, FDCPA, FOIA, appeals) start clocks on receipt; a DP both starts them and preserves objections if an org tries to reset the clock.
• Mask as X, not not-Y. Present like “one of us” to get routed to competence (legal/compliance/risk), rather than merely hiding disfavored traits.
• Status is a tool, not a prerequisite. You can “cosplay” a DP before you feel you’ve “earned it”—and it already works.

Signature moves (with examples)

• “Get it in writing.” Ask for immediate written memorialization (“email me the offer/details now”). After meetings, send “Thanks for meeting—here’s what we discussed…” If someone objects to note-taking in a context where it’s normal, keep the notes and document the objection.
• Demand written reasons with citations. “Please set forth your reasons in writing, and cite the authority/policy.” This both escalates and deters improvisation by frontline staff.
• Escalate to the right inbox. Address banks at Office of the President / General Counsel / Chief Compliance / Investor Relations; use certified mail/return receipt when needed.
• Invoke regulators precisely (not theatrically). For payments fraud: cite Regulation E timelines/liability; for collections: FDCPA; for public records: FOIA; for Delaware entities: the books-and-records regime. You don’t threaten—you obligate.
• Preserve objections; don’t concede reality. When a bureaucracy says “start over because you didn’t attach X,” send X while reiterating that their clock started with your prior complete request.
• Ask the options question. In failure cases (airlines, logistics): calm “What are my options?” loops the system into exception paths and supervisor playbooks without mis-routing yourself.
• Authenticate data via independent channels. Don’t trust PDFs/screenshares; call the bank on a published number, on speaker, with the customer’s consent, and have the rep read specifics.
• Use wrappers to route to competence. Sometimes media (“request for comment”), a regulator, or a high-status sender ID moves you from “queue” to “resolution.”
• Diary and contemporaneous records. Keep timestamped notes (text or short video). Later, they become the single contemporaneous account—often decisive.
• Structure search like a pro. Know the canonical authorities and terms (“Fannie Mae Seller’s Guide $TOPIC,” IRS site, etc.) so you cite rules, not vibes.

What the DP sounds like (stylistic tells)

• Brisk, organized, polite, specific. Prefers “facts and law” over table-pounding. Dialogues, checklists, and play-by-play transcripts (“Me: … GA: … Supervisor: …”) are common.

• Institutional fluency without cosplay-lawyering. Frequent “not a lawyer” disclaimers; uses exact regulatory names, timelines, and obligations.

• Metaphors from games/engineering. “Deep magick,” “state machine,” “shot clock,” “spells,” “spend character points,” “incantations.”

• Parenthetical asides and a wry edge. Gentle snark at institutional foibles; respect for competent counterparts; clear-eyed about perverse incentives.

• Stock incantations:

  • “Please set forth your reasons in writing.”
  • “Kindly cite the specific policy/regulation.”
  • “For your convenience, attached is X; the statutory timeline began on <date>.”
  • “What are my options?”

Things a Dangerous Professional does (concretely)

• Starts the clock correctly. Sends the letter/email to the binding address, logs receipt, and calendars the deadline.
• Documents everything. Names, dates, call summaries, meeting notes, discomforts/irregularities, and who asked you not to write.
• Routes to people who can act. Legal/compliance/risk/IR instead of Tier-1 CS; supervisors instead of new gate agents.
• Quotes the institution to itself (carefully). Frontline misstatements are ignored unless useful when adversarially construed against the institution.
• Uses the right channel for the right effect. Certified mail for notice; phone to authenticate; press for “request for comment”; email to create institutional memory.
• Stays inside the truth and the rules. Never forges status or makes legal conclusions; relies on their rules and your record.

Boundaries and failure modes

• Title ≠ competence. Some with the title are “Dangerous to Themselves and Others”—overconfident, under-rigorous, or table-pounders.
• Politeness matters. The tone is professional, not performative aggression; the goal is to trigger the right state machine, not win an argument.
• Cost/benefit judgment. Pick investments (e.g., authentication steps, rebooking paths) that actually move risk and outcomes.

Why this matters now

• LLMs lower the cost of the incantation. Well-formed letters and “DP voice” are now cheap to produce, so more civilians can reliably trigger the right systems.
• Institutions aren’t resized for the volume. Many adjudication desks have statutory timelines but finite capacity; DPs understand (and ethically use) those constraints.

---

Quick starter kit (usable today)

• After any consequential conversation: send the recap email.
• When stonewalled: “Please set forth your reasons in writing, citing the specific policy/regulation.”
• For fraud/charge disputes (U.S. consumer accounts): cite Regulation E, request investigation outcome in writing, and note the timeline.
• When a process “restarts”: attach what they asked for, preserve your objection, and restate the original receipt date.
• In travel/service failures: ask “What are my options?” until a supervisor surfaces the exception playbook.
• Keep a diary (text or 1-minute video). Time stamps are power.