8 ms·

I disagree with a lot of this article because it assumes that we are efficient robots that just need things to be searchable and written down. Tools are also a

by papaf 5y ago

I disagree with a lot of this article because it assumes that we are efficient robots that just need things to be searchable and written down. Tools are also a bit lacking -- in theory writing stuff in a wiki is useful but then try finding the information with, say, Confluence search. The article also assumes every one is a native speaker who can write quickly and clearly in a chat -- in a lot of international projects this is not the case. I find that there is less chance for misunderstanding and aggression if you disagree over a video call. Also, human contact and informal communication make life and working more enjoyable.

the_gipsy 5y ago
The article assumes that we are NOT efficient robots that can store any and all information that we get in our heads.
masklinn 5y ago
> I disagree with a lot of this article because it assumes that we are efficient robots that just need things to be searchable and written down. It assumes no such thing. If anything it assumes the opposite of your assertion, that we are not perfectly efficient robots able to instantaneously and fully recall the content of transient discussions. Written content is perennial and searchable, so it can be retrieved in the future if necessary without being limited by human foibles and memory. Even if the search is bad and the system is not especially designed for it, I regularly manage to find information I dimly recall through search in discord and friends, something which would be entirely impossible using video calls. IME that is in fact a regular issue, people asserting that things were told during discussions and there's no way to confirm it, have context, … because the discussion was a voice / video call. > The article also assumes every one is a native speaker who can write quickly and clearly in a chat -- in a lot of international projects this is not the case. Have you been in that scenario, ever? Video calls are infinitely worse than typed text between non-native speakers. And if the call is not going to be in english… why would the written communication be so? > I find that there is less chance for misunderstanding and aggression if you disagree over a video call. I find that there are regular shouting matches over video calls, and collisions between speakers makes the experience miserable. It's also impossible to dive in and out and recover the information, if you arrive on a group discussion midway you can read the history, if you dive out for a bit you can read what you missed. On a video call, it's gone. > Also, human contact and informal communication make life and working more enjoyable. To you.
- foldr 5y ago
  While there may be some people who don’t enjoy human contact, I think it’s a little unfair to suggest that this is some kind of idiosyncratic preference of the original poster. It’s a basic human need. Most people who work full time will want to have some kind of social contact within working hours.
  - masklinn 5y ago
    > While there may be some people who don’t enjoy human contact We're not discussing human contact, we're discussing video calls. > I think it’s a little unfair to suggest that this is some kind of idiosyncratic preference of the original poster. So pointing out that people differ is "a little unfair" but asserting liking video calls is a universal human requirement and enjoyment is fine? > It’s a basic human need. History is full of people who happily did without.
    - foldr 5y ago
      It was not clear from your post that you were referring to video calls rather than human contact in general. Here is the part I was responding to: >> Also, human contact and informal communication make life and working more enjoyable. >To you. I think the vast majority of people would prefer having social contact via video calls to the alternative of having no social contact or having it only via text chat - yes. But I was not talking specifically about video calls.
      - tluyben2 5y ago
        > I think the vast majority of people would prefer having social contact via video calls to the alternative of having no social contact I believe that too, but for me at least, video chat is for chitchat and banter and text chat for everything, including substance. This is the same for in person; I enjoy going with clients and colleagues to coffeeshops and bars, but we don't get much done in either (in bar, if with techies, actually more than you would think) but it is nice for the human contact. (Talking work context here if that was not clear)
thaumasiotes 5y ago
> The article also assumes every one is a native speaker who can write quickly and clearly in a chat -- in a lot of international projects this is not the case. You think non-native speakers have an easier time communicating in real time in a video call than through text? A video call is the worst case for a non-native speaker. (Well, OK, a phone call is even worse. But being synchronous and relying on their ability to understand the spoken language are both terrible ideas if you're concerned about what makes things easy for non-native speakers.)
- nottorp 5y ago
  > You think non-native speakers have an easier time communicating in real time in a video call than through text? A video call is the worst case for a non-native speaker. Oh yea, I forgot about this because I don't do video/audio calls. A non native speaker is NOT exposed to spoken english daily. In some countries they even dub Hollywood movies so not even their entertainment is in english. And where movies are subtitled you tend to read the subtitles so you don't bother understanding accents, speech over explosions and stuff like that. Written english is another thing, if you do programming. There's no point of looking for docs in your native language; the originals are in english and always more up to date. So maybe the non native speakers have trouble because the OP speaks too fast / has an unfamiliar accent?
  - astonex 5y ago
    I work as a non-native speaker in Korea. Speaking and listening is just insanely harder than reading and writing. I can be productive as long as I'm exchanging messages on Github/Messenger, but meetings are horrendous.
    - jdshaffer 5y ago
      I have the opposite problem here in Japan. I can listen and speak pretty well, even in meetings, but written stuff kills me because of all the kanji...
      - 5y ago
nottorp 5y ago
It's also implying that you do need to train a bit to work efficiently in a distributed team. > The article also assumes every one is a native speaker who can write quickly and clearly in a chat -- in a lot of international projects this is not the case. These are two different things. Native speaker is one, having the skill of writing quicky and clearly is another. They're unrelated. Both are trainable. Not to mention that in my experience it's the native speakers (of English i guess?) have the worst spelling :) > Also, human contact and informal communication make life and working more enjoyable. And... informal communication has to be in a video call? It can't be in writing? As for the human contact, I do recommend having a social life outside work. Distributed or not distributed work. Source of statements: been working in distributed teams for 20 years, not since this pandemic.
- papaf 5y ago
  And... informal communication has to be in a video call? It can't be in writing? On video calls and in meatspace, you get to see peoples facial expressions, their smiles, they can move their hands and make gestures. I much prefer that to text. As for the human contact, I do recommend having a social life outside work. Distributed or not distributed work. You are correct but, personally, I think spending 8 hours a day without seeing faces is too much.
tluyben2 5y ago
We work with people from all over the world, most not native speaking. For technical stuff, in our experience, voice or video calls are the most inefficient thing possible. Because spoken bad English is far worse than written, a lot of people have less than optimal internet bandwidth and latency and, worst, after the call the details are kind of lost. So first writing the main points in chat, if then some people (usually this is 1 person) want a call, we do a call and then flesh the details out over chat and in docs/wiki. Informal comms is also via chat; far more so then in video as, because of the overchatter and bad connections, jokes and quips get lost far easier. Ymmv of course but we avoid vid/voice like the plague, so far it hurt us with large amounts of miscommunication and time loss. By the way, been doing this and like this for 25 years now.
- nottorp 5y ago
  > By the way, been doing this and like this for 25 years now. Yeah, he must be new to distributed work :)
f6v 5y ago
The assumption that text is always superior to a sync conversation is too strong. Often you get the crucial bits by interrupting someone mid discussion and asking for specifics.
- baash05 5y ago
  But you can do that in text too. I mean if it's wall of text dump, no; but if people keep their chat blocks short, then it's a two way convo. (or more)
- throwaway98797 5y ago
  Text suffers from being precise but accurate. Voice is accurate but not precise. Different problems are resolved better by one than the other. Brain storming better in voice. Technical details of an app that needs to be coded, writting is better.
smallerfish 5y ago
> in theory writing stuff in a wiki is useful but then try finding the information with, say, Confluence search. If the company/team wiki isn't organized to optimize for browsing to relevant documentation, then you might as well use google docs (which excels at search and is terrible for browsability). A reasonable percentage of effort documenting something in a wiki should be devoted to making sure that people actually can find it, otherwise you're in cleaning-closet-in-disused-bathroom territory.
Aeolun 5y ago
> I find that there is less chance for misunderstanding and aggression if you disagree over a video call. If you put me in a video call with someone not more or less capable of communicating in our chosen common language I can practically guarantee that I’m going to want to murder them. There’s nothing worse than sitting on a long call waiting for someone to finally understand what button you want them to click. Even better if you have 500ms delay too.
- marcodave 5y ago
  500ms ? you have it lucky , try 2000ms next time for real frustration. Bonus points if you can hear yourself back unless the recipient is muting him/herself

by papaf 5y ago

the_gipsy 5y ago

The article assumes that we are NOT efficient robots that can store any and all information that we get in our heads.

masklinn 5y ago

> I disagree with a lot of this article because it assumes that we are efficient robots that just need things to be searchable and written down. It assumes no such thing. If anything it assumes the opposite of your assertion, that we are not perfectly efficient robots able to instantaneously and fully recall the content of transient discussions. Written content is perennial and searchable, so it can be retrieved in the future if necessary without being limited by human foibles and memory. Even if the search is bad and the system is not especially designed for it, I regularly manage to find information I dimly recall through search in discord and friends, something which would be entirely impossible using video calls. IME that is in fact a regular issue, people asserting that things were told during discussions and there's no way to confirm it, have context, … because the discussion was a voice / video call. > The article also assumes every one is a native speaker who can write quickly and clearly in a chat -- in a lot of international projects this is not the case. Have you been in that scenario, ever? Video calls are infinitely worse than typed text between non-native speakers. And if the call is not going to be in english… why would the written communication be so? > I find that there is less chance for misunderstanding and aggression if you disagree over a video call. I find that there are regular shouting matches over video calls, and collisions between speakers makes the experience miserable. It's also impossible to dive in and out and recover the information, if you arrive on a group discussion midway you can read the history, if you dive out for a bit you can read what you missed. On a video call, it's gone. > Also, human contact and informal communication make life and working more enjoyable. To you.

foldr 5y ago
While there may be some people who don’t enjoy human contact, I think it’s a little unfair to suggest that this is some kind of idiosyncratic preference of the original poster. It’s a basic human need. Most people who work full time will want to have some kind of social contact within working hours.
- masklinn 5y ago
  > While there may be some people who don’t enjoy human contact We're not discussing human contact, we're discussing video calls. > I think it’s a little unfair to suggest that this is some kind of idiosyncratic preference of the original poster. So pointing out that people differ is "a little unfair" but asserting liking video calls is a universal human requirement and enjoyment is fine? > It’s a basic human need. History is full of people who happily did without.
  - foldr 5y ago
    It was not clear from your post that you were referring to video calls rather than human contact in general. Here is the part I was responding to: >> Also, human contact and informal communication make life and working more enjoyable. >To you. I think the vast majority of people would prefer having social contact via video calls to the alternative of having no social contact or having it only via text chat - yes. But I was not talking specifically about video calls.
    - tluyben2 5y ago
      > I think the vast majority of people would prefer having social contact via video calls to the alternative of having no social contact I believe that too, but for me at least, video chat is for chitchat and banter and text chat for everything, including substance. This is the same for in person; I enjoy going with clients and colleagues to coffeeshops and bars, but we don't get much done in either (in bar, if with techies, actually more than you would think) but it is nice for the human contact. (Talking work context here if that was not clear)

thaumasiotes 5y ago

> The article also assumes every one is a native speaker who can write quickly and clearly in a chat -- in a lot of international projects this is not the case. You think non-native speakers have an easier time communicating in real time in a video call than through text? A video call is the worst case for a non-native speaker. (Well, OK, a phone call is even worse. But being synchronous and relying on their ability to understand the spoken language are both terrible ideas if you're concerned about what makes things easy for non-native speakers.)

nottorp 5y ago
> You think non-native speakers have an easier time communicating in real time in a video call than through text? A video call is the worst case for a non-native speaker. Oh yea, I forgot about this because I don't do video/audio calls. A non native speaker is NOT exposed to spoken english daily. In some countries they even dub Hollywood movies so not even their entertainment is in english. And where movies are subtitled you tend to read the subtitles so you don't bother understanding accents, speech over explosions and stuff like that. Written english is another thing, if you do programming. There's no point of looking for docs in your native language; the originals are in english and always more up to date. So maybe the non native speakers have trouble because the OP speaks too fast / has an unfamiliar accent?
- astonex 5y ago
  I work as a non-native speaker in Korea. Speaking and listening is just insanely harder than reading and writing. I can be productive as long as I'm exchanging messages on Github/Messenger, but meetings are horrendous.
  - jdshaffer 5y ago
    I have the opposite problem here in Japan. I can listen and speak pretty well, even in meetings, but written stuff kills me because of all the kanji...
    - 5y ago

nottorp 5y ago

It's also implying that you do need to train a bit to work efficiently in a distributed team. > The article also assumes every one is a native speaker who can write quickly and clearly in a chat -- in a lot of international projects this is not the case. These are two different things. Native speaker is one, having the skill of writing quicky and clearly is another. They're unrelated. Both are trainable. Not to mention that in my experience it's the native speakers (of English i guess?) have the worst spelling :) > Also, human contact and informal communication make life and working more enjoyable. And... informal communication has to be in a video call? It can't be in writing? As for the human contact, I do recommend having a social life outside work. Distributed or not distributed work. Source of statements: been working in distributed teams for 20 years, not since this pandemic.

papaf 5y ago
And... informal communication has to be in a video call? It can't be in writing? On video calls and in meatspace, you get to see peoples facial expressions, their smiles, they can move their hands and make gestures. I much prefer that to text. As for the human contact, I do recommend having a social life outside work. Distributed or not distributed work. You are correct but, personally, I think spending 8 hours a day without seeing faces is too much.

tluyben2 5y ago

We work with people from all over the world, most not native speaking. For technical stuff, in our experience, voice or video calls are the most inefficient thing possible. Because spoken bad English is far worse than written, a lot of people have less than optimal internet bandwidth and latency and, worst, after the call the details are kind of lost. So first writing the main points in chat, if then some people (usually this is 1 person) want a call, we do a call and then flesh the details out over chat and in docs/wiki. Informal comms is also via chat; far more so then in video as, because of the overchatter and bad connections, jokes and quips get lost far easier. Ymmv of course but we avoid vid/voice like the plague, so far it hurt us with large amounts of miscommunication and time loss. By the way, been doing this and like this for 25 years now.

nottorp 5y ago
> By the way, been doing this and like this for 25 years now. Yeah, he must be new to distributed work :)

f6v 5y ago

The assumption that text is always superior to a sync conversation is too strong. Often you get the crucial bits by interrupting someone mid discussion and asking for specifics.

baash05 5y ago
But you can do that in text too. I mean if it's wall of text dump, no; but if people keep their chat blocks short, then it's a two way convo. (or more)
throwaway98797 5y ago
Text suffers from being precise but accurate. Voice is accurate but not precise. Different problems are resolved better by one than the other. Brain storming better in voice. Technical details of an app that needs to be coded, writting is better.

smallerfish 5y ago

> in theory writing stuff in a wiki is useful but then try finding the information with, say, Confluence search. If the company/team wiki isn't organized to optimize for browsing to relevant documentation, then you might as well use google docs (which excels at search and is terrible for browsability). A reasonable percentage of effort documenting something in a wiki should be devoted to making sure that people actually can find it, otherwise you're in cleaning-closet-in-disused-bathroom territory.

Aeolun 5y ago

> I find that there is less chance for misunderstanding and aggression if you disagree over a video call. If you put me in a video call with someone not more or less capable of communicating in our chosen common language I can practically guarantee that I’m going to want to murder them. There’s nothing worse than sitting on a long call waiting for someone to finally understand what button you want them to click. Even better if you have 500ms delay too.

marcodave 5y ago
500ms ? you have it lucky , try 2000ms next time for real frustration. Bonus points if you can hear yourself back unless the recipient is muting him/herself