19 ms·

The key, I find, is to be extremely direct and brutal in one on ones. Don't hold back, but be very supportive and positive when more than two people present.

The key, I find, is to be extremely direct and brutal in one on ones. Don't hold back, but be very supportive and positive when more than two people present. I try to explain this to be people I work with, but I don't think everyone appreciates it. Horrible people, in my opinion, are those that do the opposite.

JoshTriplett 8y ago
So, being nicer when someone else is watching and could corroborate, while being brutal to people when it's your word against theirs? I wonder why people don't appreciate that advice. "Direct" does not need to go hand-in-hand with "brutal". Don't change your behavior based on who's watching; people deserve to be treated well regardless. EDIT: For clarity, I'm not necessarily suggesting this is the intention, but rather, that this would be the net effect, and a problem with that approach.
- arkades 8y ago
  I mean, you did just spin it into its worst interpretation. I read the grandparent post as meaning, "Be brutal when the least ego / public stature is at risk, but never cut people down in front of their peers."
  - JoshTriplett 8y ago
    That assumes the only problem with being brutal is making people look bad in front of their peers. That's far from the only problem with being brutal.
    - arkades 8y ago
      I make no such assumption, and I'm not a fan of brutality. I'm not endorsing his position, I'm just rephrasing it as what I believe he meant to say. I'm also not a fan of intentionally putting the worst possible spin on someone's words. Reading charitably is pretty much always a net positive for any thread.
    - dang 8y ago
      arkades is right, and there's a site guideline that specifically addresses this: Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. It's easily plausible that one of blazespin's concerns is not to humiliate people in front of their peers. This is a problem with this sort of discussion generally: a lot of the people arguing for others not to treat each other badly, treat others very badly indeed whilst arguing it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - JoshTriplett 8y ago
        I could certainly have phrased my comment more clearly. My point was not necessarily that that was what they were saying, but rather, that that is a likely outcome of that approach. I've added an edit to my original comment clarifying this.
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
- tormeh 8y ago
  Well, you avoid anyone losing face, which is important. Being brutal, however, is not a good advice in any situation except a rap battle. Direct != Brutal.
DannyBee 8y ago
You can be direct without being brutal. Any variant that invites perspective sharing rather than brutality works fine to accomplish almost any direct feedback. (IE brutality usually does not admit the possibility others may have a different perspective. You are going to get a lot farther in changing/helping people if you listen to their perspective instead of just yours)
- marmot777 8y ago
  Brutal ultimately undermines because it'll eventually push key people out.
DoreenMichele 8y ago
That's actually the very definition of abuse. I am much more comfortable with people being publicly blunt. At least there is no gaslighting involved where the victim wonders if they imagined it because everyone keeps telling them "he would never do that" or whatever. If you are on excellent terms with someone and they trust you, etc, it can work to be more blunt in private. But most people doing that are just hiding their own bad behavior and that's it. Which makes it a form of corruption.
- threatofrain 8y ago
  Perhaps you might prefer open debate or critique, but I think most people would prefer that negative speech not occur in public. I think even politely negotiated debates can end up looking embarrassing if other people who are watching can form a justifiably negative narrative. When people are having a discussion in a visible business setting, to some degree, the precise words being spoken by either party become less relevant than the kinds of narratives people can form about either of you. It becomes a negotiation of PR rather than a discussion of ideas.
  - DoreenMichele 8y ago
    Let me put this another way: Abusive people are always, without fail, at their ugliest when there are no witnesses and they have plausible deniability. I'm aware that dressing someone down in public has its own problems.
    - Dylan16807 8y ago
      You're describing a situation where they are behaving this way only when alone with a specific person. The actual suggestion was for all one on one interaction.
- dragonsky67 8y ago
  I think it needs to be acknowledged that many people don't get subtle feedback. If you give me subtle feedback, either positive or negative, chances are I will miss it all together. I need feedback that is clear and obvious, what others could categorises as being blunt or abusive otherwise I will walk away scratching my head wondering if I've done well or otherwise. Reminds me of advise that was given to my Wife by a friend when I got married. Subtle hints don't work, Hints don't work, if you have something you don't like that he is doing, make sure you are bloody obvious when you talk to him about it.
djrobstep 8y ago
Psycho alert
- dang 8y ago
  If you continue to post uncivil and/or unsubstantive comments to HN, we're going to have to ban you. We've already asked you several times not to do that. Could you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and fix it going forward?

JoshTriplett 8y ago

So, being nicer when someone else is watching and could corroborate, while being brutal to people when it's your word against theirs? I wonder why people don't appreciate that advice. "Direct" does not need to go hand-in-hand with "brutal". Don't change your behavior based on who's watching; people deserve to be treated well regardless. EDIT: For clarity, I'm not necessarily suggesting this is the intention, but rather, that this would be the net effect, and a problem with that approach.

arkades 8y ago
I mean, you did just spin it into its worst interpretation. I read the grandparent post as meaning, "Be brutal when the least ego / public stature is at risk, but never cut people down in front of their peers."
- JoshTriplett 8y ago
  That assumes the only problem with being brutal is making people look bad in front of their peers. That's far from the only problem with being brutal.
  - arkades 8y ago
    I make no such assumption, and I'm not a fan of brutality. I'm not endorsing his position, I'm just rephrasing it as what I believe he meant to say. I'm also not a fan of intentionally putting the worst possible spin on someone's words. Reading charitably is pretty much always a net positive for any thread.
  - dang 8y ago
    arkades is right, and there's a site guideline that specifically addresses this: Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. It's easily plausible that one of blazespin's concerns is not to humiliate people in front of their peers. This is a problem with this sort of discussion generally: a lot of the people arguing for others not to treat each other badly, treat others very badly indeed whilst arguing it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - JoshTriplett 8y ago
      I could certainly have phrased my comment more clearly. My point was not necessarily that that was what they were saying, but rather, that that is a likely outcome of that approach. I've added an edit to my original comment clarifying this.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
tormeh 8y ago
Well, you avoid anyone losing face, which is important. Being brutal, however, is not a good advice in any situation except a rap battle. Direct != Brutal.

DannyBee 8y ago

You can be direct without being brutal. Any variant that invites perspective sharing rather than brutality works fine to accomplish almost any direct feedback. (IE brutality usually does not admit the possibility others may have a different perspective. You are going to get a lot farther in changing/helping people if you listen to their perspective instead of just yours)

marmot777 8y ago
Brutal ultimately undermines because it'll eventually push key people out.

DoreenMichele 8y ago

That's actually the very definition of abuse. I am much more comfortable with people being publicly blunt. At least there is no gaslighting involved where the victim wonders if they imagined it because everyone keeps telling them "he would never do that" or whatever. If you are on excellent terms with someone and they trust you, etc, it can work to be more blunt in private. But most people doing that are just hiding their own bad behavior and that's it. Which makes it a form of corruption.

threatofrain 8y ago
Perhaps you might prefer open debate or critique, but I think most people would prefer that negative speech not occur in public. I think even politely negotiated debates can end up looking embarrassing if other people who are watching can form a justifiably negative narrative. When people are having a discussion in a visible business setting, to some degree, the precise words being spoken by either party become less relevant than the kinds of narratives people can form about either of you. It becomes a negotiation of PR rather than a discussion of ideas.
- DoreenMichele 8y ago
  Let me put this another way: Abusive people are always, without fail, at their ugliest when there are no witnesses and they have plausible deniability. I'm aware that dressing someone down in public has its own problems.
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    You're describing a situation where they are behaving this way only when alone with a specific person. The actual suggestion was for all one on one interaction.
dragonsky67 8y ago
I think it needs to be acknowledged that many people don't get subtle feedback. If you give me subtle feedback, either positive or negative, chances are I will miss it all together. I need feedback that is clear and obvious, what others could categorises as being blunt or abusive otherwise I will walk away scratching my head wondering if I've done well or otherwise. Reminds me of advise that was given to my Wife by a friend when I got married. Subtle hints don't work, Hints don't work, if you have something you don't like that he is doing, make sure you are bloody obvious when you talk to him about it.

djrobstep 8y ago

Psycho alert

dang 8y ago
If you continue to post uncivil and/or unsubstantive comments to HN, we're going to have to ban you. We've already asked you several times not to do that. Could you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and fix it going forward?