4 ms·

Some non idioms I find annoying: * "We" instead of "I". on StackOverflow "how do we reverse a string?" * "showstopper", no matter how trivial a thing is, it w

Some non idioms I find annoying: * "We" instead of "I". on StackOverflow "how do we reverse a string?" * "showstopper", no matter how trivial a thing is, it will be a showstopper for someone: "the lack of a dark theme is a showstopper" * "workflow", no matter how trivial an activity is, it will be someone's workflow

duckmysick 5y ago
I catch myself overusing the word "workflow". Any good replacements? I tried "activity" and "task" but they don't feel natural to me.
- sorokod 5y ago
  For me workflow implies something substantial and so appropriate occasionally. Activity, task or just a way to do things works too.
cdcarter 5y ago
> "We" instead of "I". on StackOverflow "how do we reverse a string?" I usually notice this with english as a second language speakers, it's probably a more innocent mistake than people choosing a word like "workflow" or "bandwidth".
elwell 5y ago
> "We" instead of "I" What about "we" instead of "you"? E.g., "Can we change the color of this button to blue?"... "Yes, I can do that." It used to bother me, but when you're in the position of telling other people what to do, I suppose it sounds less demanding.
- sorokod 5y ago
  I see it more in the spirit of "how are we feeling today". Some sort of false comradery.
  - denton-scratch 5y ago
    I hate that! My reply is often of the form "I'm feeling fine, but you must speak for yourself."
sorokod 5y ago
Ah, forgot "community". No matter how loosely related a group of people is, someone will call it a community, e.g. "the HN community"
commandlinefan 5y ago
> no matter how trivial a thing is, it will be a showstopper for someone I used to work for a big web site that produced standardized requirements documents ahead of every project. Part of the standard was the "flexibility matrix": the PM or "stakeholder" who was producing the requirements document was supposed to identify whether scope or timeline was most flexible. Of course, for about five years running after the standard document template came out, every project was "least flexible" on timeline and "most flexible" on scope. We finally started calling them on their impossible timelines and tried flexing the scope by pushing some of the vague requirements off to later releases. The result? They added another column to the "flexibility matrix" called "resources", as in they were willing to hire more people to meet all the requirements in the mandated timeline. That was also not true.
nharada 5y ago
I often see "we" on internal documents written by one person -- I think it comes from the convention in academic papers where you'd use "we" to refer to the researcher(s), even if it's just one author. I don't personally mind it in this context.
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  I was taught in science at school that it was incorrect to use the first-person-singular in lab write-ups. "A sample was heated over a bunsen, and it was found on cooling to have turned white".
  - nharada 5y ago
    There's an interesting answer and linked article here: https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/2948 https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/2948

duckmysick 5y ago

I catch myself overusing the word "workflow". Any good replacements? I tried "activity" and "task" but they don't feel natural to me.

sorokod 5y ago
For me workflow implies something substantial and so appropriate occasionally. Activity, task or just a way to do things works too.

cdcarter 5y ago

> "We" instead of "I". on StackOverflow "how do we reverse a string?" I usually notice this with english as a second language speakers, it's probably a more innocent mistake than people choosing a word like "workflow" or "bandwidth".

elwell 5y ago

> "We" instead of "I" What about "we" instead of "you"? E.g., "Can we change the color of this button to blue?"... "Yes, I can do that." It used to bother me, but when you're in the position of telling other people what to do, I suppose it sounds less demanding.

sorokod 5y ago
I see it more in the spirit of "how are we feeling today". Some sort of false comradery.
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  I hate that! My reply is often of the form "I'm feeling fine, but you must speak for yourself."

sorokod 5y ago

Ah, forgot "community". No matter how loosely related a group of people is, someone will call it a community, e.g. "the HN community"

commandlinefan 5y ago

> no matter how trivial a thing is, it will be a showstopper for someone I used to work for a big web site that produced standardized requirements documents ahead of every project. Part of the standard was the "flexibility matrix": the PM or "stakeholder" who was producing the requirements document was supposed to identify whether scope or timeline was most flexible. Of course, for about five years running after the standard document template came out, every project was "least flexible" on timeline and "most flexible" on scope. We finally started calling them on their impossible timelines and tried flexing the scope by pushing some of the vague requirements off to later releases. The result? They added another column to the "flexibility matrix" called "resources", as in they were willing to hire more people to meet all the requirements in the mandated timeline. That was also not true.

nharada 5y ago

I often see "we" on internal documents written by one person -- I think it comes from the convention in academic papers where you'd use "we" to refer to the researcher(s), even if it's just one author. I don't personally mind it in this context.

denton-scratch 5y ago
I was taught in science at school that it was incorrect to use the first-person-singular in lab write-ups. "A sample was heated over a bunsen, and it was found on cooling to have turned white".
- nharada 5y ago
  There's an interesting answer and linked article here: https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/2948 https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/2948