criteriooperativo

There is an uncomfortable contradiction that many users hold without naming it: they say they are evaluating, but they act as if they have already decided. It is neither a moral nor emotional contradiction. It is operational. It manifests in what is avoided for review, in what is no longer questioned, in the type of questions that are no longer asked. From the outside, it seems like caution. From the inside, it is protection.

The mild accusation is this —and it doesn’t need to be dramatized—: you are not evaluating; you are seeking permission not to change. The language of evaluation remains active, but its function is no longer to compare real options, but to justify the permanence in a direction that has become comfortable. Evaluation has ceased to be an open process and has become a defensive mechanism.

There are decisions that are not made at an identifiable moment. They do not appear as a clear act or as a conscious gesture. They form beforehand, silently, while the user believes they are still evaluating options. From their own perception, the decision does not yet exist. From the structure in which they move, it is already underway.
The initial contradiction is not in the system, but in the user themselves. They believe they are observing, comparing, waiting for better conditions. They think their margin is still open because they have not executed anything visible. However, their behavior has already begun to align with a concrete option. They have stopped exploring real alternatives, have started to justify a direction, and to discard the others without reviewing them with the same rigor. The decision was not announced, but it is already governing.

There are decisions that are perceived as open only because they have not yet been executed. The user feels that they are still 'evaluating', that they have room to wait, that they can choose the exact moment. But in certain systems, the margin does not close when the action occurs; it closes beforehand, at the moment when a condition is met. From the outside, everything seems the same. From the inside, the decision space no longer exists.

The first trap is that this closure is not always visible. It does not appear as an alarm or an obvious signal. Sometimes it manifests as normality: the system continues to function, the interface remains available, the routine stays intact. The user interprets that continuity as freedom. And yet, freedom was the margin. When the margin closed, what remained was only movement within a already defined framework.