True, but there certainly is a time and place for taking the bolded path above. Like when the WAS is seriously threatening to start the D process. At this point "what works" is anything that stalls the D process and gives you a little time. Playing hard ball at the wrong time will only move you apart quicker.
I could have agreed with the first part of your post, FY, by saying "Well, not sure that if it's some tactical 'time' or 'place' but more like 'I wouldn't advise anyone to intentionally set out to be unnecessarily argumentative or combative'."
But it's precisely when your spouse starts down the divorce path that I would advise anyone to jettison ANY sort of "Oooh, I don't want to make him/her angry!" thoughts of mollification.
But that's all really here nor there -- my main point was people need a better set of criteria than "He/she seems to be nicer lately" to measure whether or not their efforts are "working." Because at best, it's a neutral piece of data, and at worst it's an intentional smoke-screen, as the wayward spouse is intentionally "nice" to the betrayed spouse in order to keep them in their proper place and to control them.
I would rather see someone define what "works" as "Is he/she making a demonstrable move back towards the marriage?" or "Has he/she stalled their once-hot divorce process?" or "Has she/he reduced or eliminated their contact with OM/OW?" -- that sort of thing. Far to many people go by whether or not their being "nice" or being "angry" ... especially us classic conflict-avoiders.
