3 ms·

It is entirely possible. However, assholes will do it because they find they can have control over things. And still others, like myself, will do it despite not

by st3v3r 10y ago

It is entirely possible. However, assholes will do it because they find they can have control over things. And still others, like myself, will do it despite not really wanting to. I find it's extremely easy to "shut down" things in a discussion like that, and make other people not want to speak, even though I don't want to. It's much more difficult to take a bit of time, rethink how I'm going to say something, and try to phrase it in a way that still encourages people to talk about ideas.

Karunamon 10y ago
Serious question: At what point does it become the problem of the person to integrate vs the problem of the group to accommodate? We've heard many stories of how it only takes one asshole on a team to ruin the team. However, assholery takes many forms. It includes the perpetually acerbic who's impossible to work with, but it also includes the perpetually offended who derails conversations into pointless tone arguments and recursive meta-discussion unless you walk on metaphorical eggshells when speaking to them. Lots of talk about the former, little to none about the latter. I'd wager that if you're running a team whose purpose is to accomplish a set goal, the latter is necessarily more destructive than the former from a sheer time commitment standpoint, and that's before discussing the "meta is murder"[1] principle. Then again, I'm speaking from the standpoint of a group outsider. If you have a culture that demands civility above all else (up to and including logic and correctness), that group is probably okay with how they work, and would rightly judge poorly anyone who wouldn't conform to that culture. [1]: https://blog.codinghorror.com/meta-is-murder/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/meta-is-murder/
- st3v3r 10y ago
  I would say it depends on how much of an effort is made on the part of the person. If they're not making any effort, then why should any accommodation be made for them? Get rid of them, and find someone who will at least make an effort. If they are making an effort, it still can be difficult, because even though they're making an effort, they're still shutting down other members of the team.

by st3v3r 10y ago

Karunamon 10y ago

Serious question: At what point does it become the problem of the person to integrate vs the problem of the group to accommodate? We've heard many stories of how it only takes one asshole on a team to ruin the team. However, assholery takes many forms. It includes the perpetually acerbic who's impossible to work with, but it also includes the perpetually offended who derails conversations into pointless tone arguments and recursive meta-discussion unless you walk on metaphorical eggshells when speaking to them. Lots of talk about the former, little to none about the latter. I'd wager that if you're running a team whose purpose is to accomplish a set goal, the latter is necessarily more destructive than the former from a sheer time commitment standpoint, and that's before discussing the "meta is murder"[1] principle. Then again, I'm speaking from the standpoint of a group outsider. If you have a culture that demands civility above all else (up to and including logic and correctness), that group is probably okay with how they work, and would rightly judge poorly anyone who wouldn't conform to that culture. [1]: https://blog.codinghorror.com/meta-is-murder/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/meta-is-murder/

st3v3r 10y ago
I would say it depends on how much of an effort is made on the part of the person. If they're not making any effort, then why should any accommodation be made for them? Get rid of them, and find someone who will at least make an effort. If they are making an effort, it still can be difficult, because even though they're making an effort, they're still shutting down other members of the team.