4 ms·
This is awful advice, and really only applicable for anyone who isn't responsible to anyone else for their decision making. Has this author never had to sell on
by pedro_fartinez 5y ago
This is awful advice, and really only applicable for anyone who isn't responsible to anyone else for their decision making. Has this author never had to sell one of their ideas, or argue for a particular implementation detail, or explain a mistake? Explaining thinking is a cornerstone in building consensus, discussion, advocacy, and leadership. It invites conversation and dialog, bringing people into an understanding. Most jobs are foundationally a communal activity, and no man is an island. Tough to have to work with someone who never gives an explanation for anything.
- solarkraft 5y agoFor a more technical example: I think a lot of us have come across systems that seemed weird so we ask "what the fuck were they thinking, this sucks". A lot of times this leads to frustration and the urge to rebuild. And it's all because the reasons for it being that way aren't clear (hey, documentation is important). More often than not, the reasons for a particular decision are sound and, if given, can foster acceptance and appreciation.
- tpoacher 5y agoTotally different context. Explaining decisions in a documentation setting is wholly appropriate, and completely unrelated to what the author is arguing here, which is people are not entitled to an explanation why their request is declined, when the main point of the explanation is to better enable coaxing an agreement. I see no realistic scenario where proper documentation would make a downstream developer pick up the phone and ask for favours.