4 ms·

> I need communication that is technically brutal but personally respectful. And sometimes being personally disrespectful yields better results. Which is, afte

by zeveb 11y ago

> I need communication that is technically brutal but personally respectful. And sometimes being personally disrespectful yields better results. Which is, after all, what one wants out of a software project: results, not happy feelings. I think we'd all like to be personally respected (I know I would). But I also think that almost all of us have done things which aren't respectable (I know I have); and I believe that at least for some people, the shame of public disrespect is part of the learning experience involved in not doing it again. If this atmosphere of harsh personal criticism does yield better results, then it's necessary. I'm reminded of the old adage, 'if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.' Heat is necessary to cook (a kitchen in summer is miserable, particularly without air conditioning); interpersonal heat may be necessary to produce better software. I myself don't do so well in an atmosphere of intense personal criticism, and have great difficulty giving it, but I consider those my own personality flaws.

chasing 11y ago
> If this atmosphere of harsh personal criticism does yield better results, then it's necessary. That's a pretty big "if." And my personal experience is that, no, working in an "atmosphere of harsh personal criticism" does not yield better results. It makes good people go away. It causes people who don't want to be attacked to just keep their mouths shut and not say anything. It makes people wary of floating ideas that could be interesting but also risk being abusively mocked. It makes people not want to ask questions. It kills social cohesion. Etc.
- PeterisP 11y ago
  The evidence in large open source projects seems to support that "if" - I mean, if an atmosphere of harsh personal criticism would significantly harm the end result, and a friendlier atmosphere would improve it without undue burden to all the participants (as in, people can leave/not join because of hostile environment but also because of being asked to change their ways), then for any competing or forked project we'd expect to see the friendliest community to win, and that's often not the case. Since many (most?) large high-profile projects seem to have the problem of hostile atmosphere, then it suggests that when all things are taken into account, then policies that allow various contributors/maintainers to be as [un]hostile as they want have outperformed policies that would require them to be civil or leave the project. I mean, we're seeing developers contribute to projects run by assholes instead of saying "well, I'm ready to maintain a fork and not be an asshole" and having everyone jump ship. So no matter what they're saying, in practice they're showing that yes, that they prefer that ugly "leadership" over the alternative - pushing away the person that doesn't want to change.
  - chasing 11y ago
    I think you're confusing "a demanding atmosphere" with "an atmosphere of harsh personal criticism." But I'm happy to hear where you're getting this stat that most high-profile projects operate with "an atmosphere of harsh personal criticism." Maybe some high-profile projects are like that, but my experience is that they're the shitty exception, not the rule.
deng 11y ago
> And sometimes being personally disrespectful yields better results. Which is, after all, what one wants out of a software project: results, not happy feelings. This kind of belittlement is not doing her post justice at all, and is exactly the kind of disrespect she is criticizing. She does not talk much about her feelings at all, but about respect. It is completely possible to criticize the work of someone, also with harsh words if needed, but without being disrespectful towards the person.
the_af 11y ago
I can't see a professional situation between reasonable, intelligent adults (which I assume the author is) where being disrespectful yields better results. Better results than what? Firmly but politely explaining the other person's mistakes? You don't do well in an atmosphere of (let me paraphrase) intense personal disrespect and you consider that your personality flaw? It doesn't make sense. Having a thick skin is certainly an advantage, but being less than thrilled about having to work with disrespectful assholes is definitely not a character flaw.
yuvadam 11y ago
> Which is, after all, what one wants out of a software project: results, not happy feelings. That's a pretty disgusting utilitarian way to look at thngs. I'm sure you would never work for an employer that sees you as a unit of production, and not as a human being that requires healthy, positive human interactions.
toothbrush 11y ago
> If this atmosphere of harsh personal criticism does yield better results, then it's necessary. I'm reminded of the old adage, 'if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.' Heat is necessary to cook (a kitchen in summer is miserable, particularly without air conditioning); interpersonal heat may be necessary to produce better software. Perhaps currently, the environment is toxic, but it also manages to produce excellent results. Wouldn't anyone agree that now, moving forward, excellent results plus a supportive environment would be a step forward? How can anyone find that a regression?
- arbitrage 11y ago
  Because too many people misunderstand that change doesn't have to imply wrongness. We are good. We can become better. Becoming better doesn't mean we're bad to begin with. Too often, the suggestion or request to change is viewed as a personal attack, which in this context is highly amusing.
sssilver 11y ago
Wouldn't it be better if we didn't downvote people _only_ because their particular view doesn't click with ours? It seems like otherwise we're just getting people to be defensive and more inclined to keep their views to themselves rather than sharing and discussing everything openly.
- corndoge 11y ago
  Yes, precisely. The voting system is supposed to suppress poor content, not poor opinions. I disagree with the parent's viewpoint, but it was articulated well and respectfully presented; no point in downvoting.
- trampi 11y ago
  Actually, i do not understand why this comment was down voted. Does any downvoter care to explain?
- GFK_of_xmaspast 11y ago
  Maybe it's just feedback telling you to "[post] well enough to justify my very existence".
- rodgerd 11y ago
  The poster said he supports a culture of personal abuse to produce positive outcomes. Downvotes should be least he gets.
  - sssilver 11y ago
    I won't go into details of how I never said I supported "a culture of personal abuse". If anything, I meant to say that I don't perceive harsh wording related to my work performance as "personal abuse". I was actually referring to zeveb's comments, which in my view received unfair downvotes of immense volume, despite being very well-formed and constructive. My own comments didn't even get downvoted that badly, and as of right now I'm still in net positive.
  - zeveb 11y ago
    I did not say that I support a culture of personal abuse; I wrote that given the right conditions then personal disrespect can be appropriate. You agree! You wrote, after all, 'downvotes should be the least he gets,' which is to say that you disrespect what I wrote and feel I should be silenced. There's a difference between disrespect and abuse, just as there's a difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion. Some people aren't worthy of respect, but no-one should be abused.
andylei 11y ago
> If this atmosphere of harsh personal criticism does yield better results but does it?
- sssilver 11y ago
  With me it does.
  - tonyarkles 11y ago
    Just to make sure we're on the same page... Consider these two options: 1. "sssilver, you are a fucking moron. I'm amazed your ancestors managed to not only crawl out of the primordial soup, but to reproduce successfully enough times to bring you into existence. Christ, think about your code before submitting your pull request." 2. "This code has several memory leaks. Function bar_baz() returns a pointer to a stack-allocated data structure. On line 32, you've got a likely null-pointer dereference. There are several other problems as well. Go find some reference material or someone to help you improve." You'd prefer to get #1 as feedback rather than #2? #2 is direct and blunt, but not full of personal insults.
    - zeveb 11y ago
      #1 is far more likely to make an emotional impression than #2. That might be for good (one avoids making such bad mistakes again) or bad (one avoids making any contributions again). It's certainly more memorable.
      - tonyarkles 11y ago
        I came up with it trying to think of something vicious that contained absolutely no insight about how to be better. It doesn't actually have any information about what the bad mistakes might be. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the whole idea that that'd work for some people.
        zeveb 11y ago
astrocat 11y ago
>And sometimes being personally disrespectful yields better results. Which is, after all, what one wants out of a software project This is just as absurd as saying "And sometimes torture yields good information. Which is, after all, what one wants out of interrogation." Under no circumstances should we conflate being critical with being disrespectful or verbally abusive. Good criticism can always be given in a respectful manner.
RankingMember 11y ago
There's a big difference between calling someone out publicly and being a dick about it. That's what I think she's getting at here. There's always a multitude of respectful ways and disrespectful ways to go about confronting someone about something. Do you seriously believe that being publicly disrespected should be part of the learning process?
- zeveb 11y ago
  > Do you seriously believe that being publicly disrespected should be part of the learning process? Depends on the learner, the teacher and the lesson itself. If someone sweeps others at a firing range with his firearm, then getting knocked down and chewed out will probably instill a more lasting lesson that a quiet reprimand. If someone forgets to include a comment on a function, that's probably less important (although it could be, e.g. if that function were controlling a generator at a hydroelectric plant…).
  - mdpopescu 11y ago
    I am pretty sure that sweeping others with my firearm would have earned me a beating in the army...
- venomsnake 11y ago
  > Do you seriously believe that being publicly disrespected should be part of the learning process? Full Metal Jacket opening monologue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71Lft6EQh-Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71Lft6EQh-Y
  - RankingMember 11y ago
    That's not really being disrespected as much as it is being uniformly primed for the "club" you just joined. Since we're using this film as an example, though, how did that public-disrespect-as-a-teaching-tool work out for ol' Private Pyle? ;)
dalanmiller 11y ago
> And sometimes being personally disrespectful yields better results. Which is, after all, what one wants out of a software project: results, not happy feelings. I think this kind of mentality is the problem this person is talking about. Great software and happy feelings are not mutually exclusive things. > If this atmosphere of harsh personal criticism does yield better results, then it's necessary. I disagree. From what I've seen and heard, criticizing someone personally has nothing to do with development or really with the workplace at all. You can criticize my work, you can show me where I went wrong, and you can tell me where I absolutely failed but criticism about any portion of my person or my identity is unwarranted. I'd be open to being shown a situation where this is not the case, but I'm highly skeptical. Personally, I think that there _was_ one personality that thrived in core kernel/linux development and it's caustic and Linus-ian. If that group wants to see additional contributions and not alienate the people like post author then their attitude and culture need to change.

by zeveb 11y ago

chasing 11y ago

> If this atmosphere of harsh personal criticism does yield better results, then it's necessary. That's a pretty big "if." And my personal experience is that, no, working in an "atmosphere of harsh personal criticism" does not yield better results. It makes good people go away. It causes people who don't want to be attacked to just keep their mouths shut and not say anything. It makes people wary of floating ideas that could be interesting but also risk being abusively mocked. It makes people not want to ask questions. It kills social cohesion. Etc.

PeterisP 11y ago
The evidence in large open source projects seems to support that "if" - I mean, if an atmosphere of harsh personal criticism would significantly harm the end result, and a friendlier atmosphere would improve it without undue burden to all the participants (as in, people can leave/not join because of hostile environment but also because of being asked to change their ways), then for any competing or forked project we'd expect to see the friendliest community to win, and that's often not the case. Since many (most?) large high-profile projects seem to have the problem of hostile atmosphere, then it suggests that when all things are taken into account, then policies that allow various contributors/maintainers to be as [un]hostile as they want have outperformed policies that would require them to be civil or leave the project. I mean, we're seeing developers contribute to projects run by assholes instead of saying "well, I'm ready to maintain a fork and not be an asshole" and having everyone jump ship. So no matter what they're saying, in practice they're showing that yes, that they prefer that ugly "leadership" over the alternative - pushing away the person that doesn't want to change.
- chasing 11y ago
  I think you're confusing "a demanding atmosphere" with "an atmosphere of harsh personal criticism." But I'm happy to hear where you're getting this stat that most high-profile projects operate with "an atmosphere of harsh personal criticism." Maybe some high-profile projects are like that, but my experience is that they're the shitty exception, not the rule.

deng 11y ago

> And sometimes being personally disrespectful yields better results. Which is, after all, what one wants out of a software project: results, not happy feelings. This kind of belittlement is not doing her post justice at all, and is exactly the kind of disrespect she is criticizing. She does not talk much about her feelings at all, but about respect. It is completely possible to criticize the work of someone, also with harsh words if needed, but without being disrespectful towards the person.

the_af 11y ago

I can't see a professional situation between reasonable, intelligent adults (which I assume the author is) where being disrespectful yields better results. Better results than what? Firmly but politely explaining the other person's mistakes? You don't do well in an atmosphere of (let me paraphrase) intense personal disrespect and you consider that your personality flaw? It doesn't make sense. Having a thick skin is certainly an advantage, but being less than thrilled about having to work with disrespectful assholes is definitely not a character flaw.

yuvadam 11y ago

> Which is, after all, what one wants out of a software project: results, not happy feelings. That's a pretty disgusting utilitarian way to look at thngs. I'm sure you would never work for an employer that sees you as a unit of production, and not as a human being that requires healthy, positive human interactions.

toothbrush 11y ago

> If this atmosphere of harsh personal criticism does yield better results, then it's necessary. I'm reminded of the old adage, 'if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.' Heat is necessary to cook (a kitchen in summer is miserable, particularly without air conditioning); interpersonal heat may be necessary to produce better software. Perhaps currently, the environment is toxic, but it also manages to produce excellent results. Wouldn't anyone agree that now, moving forward, excellent results plus a supportive environment would be a step forward? How can anyone find that a regression?

arbitrage 11y ago
Because too many people misunderstand that change doesn't have to imply wrongness. We are good. We can become better. Becoming better doesn't mean we're bad to begin with. Too often, the suggestion or request to change is viewed as a personal attack, which in this context is highly amusing.

sssilver 11y ago

Wouldn't it be better if we didn't downvote people _only_ because their particular view doesn't click with ours? It seems like otherwise we're just getting people to be defensive and more inclined to keep their views to themselves rather than sharing and discussing everything openly.

corndoge 11y ago
Yes, precisely. The voting system is supposed to suppress poor content, not poor opinions. I disagree with the parent's viewpoint, but it was articulated well and respectfully presented; no point in downvoting.
trampi 11y ago
Actually, i do not understand why this comment was down voted. Does any downvoter care to explain?
GFK_of_xmaspast 11y ago
Maybe it's just feedback telling you to "[post] well enough to justify my very existence".
rodgerd 11y ago
The poster said he supports a culture of personal abuse to produce positive outcomes. Downvotes should be least he gets.
- sssilver 11y ago
  I won't go into details of how I never said I supported "a culture of personal abuse". If anything, I meant to say that I don't perceive harsh wording related to my work performance as "personal abuse". I was actually referring to zeveb's comments, which in my view received unfair downvotes of immense volume, despite being very well-formed and constructive. My own comments didn't even get downvoted that badly, and as of right now I'm still in net positive.
- zeveb 11y ago
  I did not say that I support a culture of personal abuse; I wrote that given the right conditions then personal disrespect can be appropriate. You agree! You wrote, after all, 'downvotes should be the least he gets,' which is to say that you disrespect what I wrote and feel I should be silenced. There's a difference between disrespect and abuse, just as there's a difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion. Some people aren't worthy of respect, but no-one should be abused.

andylei 11y ago

> If this atmosphere of harsh personal criticism does yield better results but does it?

sssilver 11y ago
With me it does.
- tonyarkles 11y ago
  Just to make sure we're on the same page... Consider these two options: 1. "sssilver, you are a fucking moron. I'm amazed your ancestors managed to not only crawl out of the primordial soup, but to reproduce successfully enough times to bring you into existence. Christ, think about your code before submitting your pull request." 2. "This code has several memory leaks. Function bar_baz() returns a pointer to a stack-allocated data structure. On line 32, you've got a likely null-pointer dereference. There are several other problems as well. Go find some reference material or someone to help you improve." You'd prefer to get #1 as feedback rather than #2? #2 is direct and blunt, but not full of personal insults.
  - zeveb 11y ago
    #1 is far more likely to make an emotional impression than #2. That might be for good (one avoids making such bad mistakes again) or bad (one avoids making any contributions again). It's certainly more memorable.
    - tonyarkles 11y ago
      I came up with it trying to think of something vicious that contained absolutely no insight about how to be better. It doesn't actually have any information about what the bad mistakes might be. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the whole idea that that'd work for some people.
      - zeveb 11y ago

astrocat 11y ago

>And sometimes being personally disrespectful yields better results. Which is, after all, what one wants out of a software project This is just as absurd as saying "And sometimes torture yields good information. Which is, after all, what one wants out of interrogation." Under no circumstances should we conflate being critical with being disrespectful or verbally abusive. Good criticism can always be given in a respectful manner.

RankingMember 11y ago

There's a big difference between calling someone out publicly and being a dick about it. That's what I think she's getting at here. There's always a multitude of respectful ways and disrespectful ways to go about confronting someone about something. Do you seriously believe that being publicly disrespected should be part of the learning process?

zeveb 11y ago
> Do you seriously believe that being publicly disrespected should be part of the learning process? Depends on the learner, the teacher and the lesson itself. If someone sweeps others at a firing range with his firearm, then getting knocked down and chewed out will probably instill a more lasting lesson that a quiet reprimand. If someone forgets to include a comment on a function, that's probably less important (although it could be, e.g. if that function were controlling a generator at a hydroelectric plant…).
- mdpopescu 11y ago
  I am pretty sure that sweeping others with my firearm would have earned me a beating in the army...
venomsnake 11y ago
> Do you seriously believe that being publicly disrespected should be part of the learning process? Full Metal Jacket opening monologue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71Lft6EQh-Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71Lft6EQh-Y
- RankingMember 11y ago
  That's not really being disrespected as much as it is being uniformly primed for the "club" you just joined. Since we're using this film as an example, though, how did that public-disrespect-as-a-teaching-tool work out for ol' Private Pyle? ;)

dalanmiller 11y ago

> And sometimes being personally disrespectful yields better results. Which is, after all, what one wants out of a software project: results, not happy feelings. I think this kind of mentality is the problem this person is talking about. Great software and happy feelings are not mutually exclusive things. > If this atmosphere of harsh personal criticism does yield better results, then it's necessary. I disagree. From what I've seen and heard, criticizing someone personally has nothing to do with development or really with the workplace at all. You can criticize my work, you can show me where I went wrong, and you can tell me where I absolutely failed but criticism about any portion of my person or my identity is unwarranted. I'd be open to being shown a situation where this is not the case, but I'm highly skeptical. Personally, I think that there _was_ one personality that thrived in core kernel/linux development and it's caustic and Linus-ian. If that group wants to see additional contributions and not alienate the people like post author then their attitude and culture need to change.