5 ms·

Do you have hard data to back that up or is it just anecdotal personal bristling whenever someone says "privilege"?

AnimalMuppet 5y ago
Real tech people don't blather. Yeah, I know, that's not "hard data". It's a pretty consistent pattern, though. Tech people have to be able to communicate with precision; they usually don't do "blowing smoke".
- tomp 5y ago
  We also know that most (99%) of people aren’t like that. So while I’ll communicate straight, efficiently, “with precision” with other tech people, I’ll adapt a nice “professional, formal” style for most other business communications. Is this unusual?
- Tehchops 5y ago
  > Real tech people Ah this fun gatekeeping meme rears it's head again. So how do you define "tech" people? Do you have a scorecard? How do they meet your assessment for "real"? Cohesive organization of atomic matter generally constitutes "real" in a lot of physics definitions. I'd argue trying to label someone a "real tech person" is a laughably subjective exercise that's so corrupted by personal bias and toxicity as to be utterly useless in evaluating someone's capability to participate in organized software engineering. Case in point: I have worked with several folks, in FAANG, who by all technical standards were "real" tech people. Polyglot programmers, could tackle any sticky logic problem. Ask them to communicate their solution to other engineers? To communicate with others with empathy? Be able to navigate conversations with directors and VPs about broadly implementing their solutions? Absolutely, 100% fell on their face. Couldn't do it. They couldn't form a cohesive, understandable, actionable statement about their work to save their lives. They'd go off on some completely pointless technical tangent that had little to do with the problem at hand. Code reviews they participated in ground to a complete fucking halt. Not because they actually addressed meaningful technical issues. No, they wanted to pontificate and show off how much smarter they were. In my not totally hard-data experience, people that maybe didn't have quite the "real tech people" skills but were expressive, capable communicators often actually shipped more meaningful work, more often, and built organizational equity not just for themselves, but for their teammates and managers too. Software development at any scale, like it or not, involves working with other people. In my experience people that go around gatekeeping and using some hilariously subjective ruler to grade "realness" aren't very effective at all.
  - 0des 5y ago
    I take it by your confrontational response that their comment hooked you somewhat. I can assure you it's the truth, and though it may or may not have been relevant to you in a way that affected you emotionally, the words ring true in my experience. Those who can do the thing don't mince words about it, the ones who can't need to massage what they're saying a bit to not lay the bad news on you like a ton of bricks; it is natural for people to want to be accepted socially.
    - Tehchops 5y ago
      "Truth" and "rings true in your experience" aren't necessarily overlapping values. Sure, it's a confrontational response, because I've seen too many solid, empathetic, capable individuals run out of tech by toxic gatekeeping bullshit just like this. Then all I'm left to manage and work with are toxic, self-aggrandizing, "um akshually" engineers who rate appearing smarter than others over working well with others and getting things done.
      - 0des 5y ago
        What is the need to interject the word 'manage' in there? Is that a powermove? edit: Have a great day, I'm going to let this one go. Things to do, code to write :)
        Tehchops 5y ago
        Have a good day as well!
      - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
        I agree that people trying to appear smarter is toxic, at least if done very often. (Even if not done often, maybe it's still toxic, just not a lethal dose.) That isn't what I meant. It really comes down to this: You can't blather at the computer. You have to make very precise statements to the computer. If you can't be precise in your communications, you can't program. That usually spills over into human communications, too. People who can talk to computers can usually talk to humans who can talk to computers, because they can use at least some of the same terms with the same meanings. And they can talk with the same mindset. You can't show off to the computer. You can't get the code to compile or to run by using more flowery wording. Tech people tend to carry that mindset into their communication with each other.
- 0des 5y ago
  100% spot on. You can usually tell on which side of the sales vs tech spectrum someone is on organizationally by this.
  - onphonenow 5y ago
    I would add managers who have super inflated views of themselves but not technical so maybe with some insecurities mixed in? Maybe mixed in with all the microaggression / toxic work environment type stuff? The folks who code are usually like, hey, let me show you this, or do you have time to look at this. THe managers, sales etc folks never say this. They will schedule you for long long boring meetings on any topic they can think of.
- Mockapapella 5y ago
  Not a recruiter, but this has been my experience too
- acuozzo 5y ago
  > Real tech people don't blather. The issue is that some people confuse being polite with blathering. https://www.mit.edu/~jcb/tact.html https://www.mit.edu/~jcb/tact.html
nsxwolf 5y ago
I personally bristle when someone says "privilege", but I don't think a recruiter should.
onphonenow 5y ago
"Do you have hard data to back that up or is it just anecdotal personal bristling whenever someone says "privilege"?" - Tehchops This is actually a perfect example of this! Let's take a minute here to look at your response. "Do you have hard data to back that up" I literally said "I've found". Folks who go on long winded discussions about privilege do exactly this - redirect, misunderstand, demand impossible things. I didn't say I had hard data, I said this was just my personal experience. I don't need hard data to back up my own experience - it's simply my experience. The "hard data" that you seem interested in is often horrendously weak in this social studies type area. This may be offensive or triggering, but measuring job performance is extremely hard, and measuring it relative to communication styles is harder. This raises a question in my mind, are you unable to evaluate the likelihood that hard data would exist so that it makes sense to demand it and you would believe what I presented if I found some? There may be some poor critical reasoning skills here. "just anecdotal personal bristling whenever someone says "privilege"" Dismissing others experience rather than engaging on the comment. Is your experience positive with folks who communicate like this? Mine is not. The writer is using this over the top over formal language. Their language choice is all a bad sign of ego ego ego. Tech folks are in high demand, they are not gods. "While I very much appreciate the fact that exceptionally talented and engaged recruiters reach out consistently"... "I will be unavailable for further discussion."
- Tehchops 5y ago
  > Dismissing others experience rather than engaging on the comment. Is your experience positive with folks who communicate like this? Mine is not I believe your original comment was: > Insta-delete if I'm doing hiring... Now who's being dismissive again? ;-) > Folks who go on long winded discussions about privilege do exactly this - redirect, misunderstand, demand impossible things. And I've found folks who respond defensively as you have tend to not reflect on their own privilege, and generally do not respond well to criticism or questioning. Of course... feel free to "dismiss" what I'm saying.

Real tech people don't blather. Yeah, I know, that's not "hard data". It's a pretty consistent pattern, though. Tech people have to be able to communicate with precision; they usually don't do "blowing smoke".

tomp 5y ago
We also know that most (99%) of people aren’t like that. So while I’ll communicate straight, efficiently, “with precision” with other tech people, I’ll adapt a nice “professional, formal” style for most other business communications. Is this unusual?
Tehchops 5y ago
> Real tech people Ah this fun gatekeeping meme rears it's head again. So how do you define "tech" people? Do you have a scorecard? How do they meet your assessment for "real"? Cohesive organization of atomic matter generally constitutes "real" in a lot of physics definitions. I'd argue trying to label someone a "real tech person" is a laughably subjective exercise that's so corrupted by personal bias and toxicity as to be utterly useless in evaluating someone's capability to participate in organized software engineering. Case in point: I have worked with several folks, in FAANG, who by all technical standards were "real" tech people. Polyglot programmers, could tackle any sticky logic problem. Ask them to communicate their solution to other engineers? To communicate with others with empathy? Be able to navigate conversations with directors and VPs about broadly implementing their solutions? Absolutely, 100% fell on their face. Couldn't do it. They couldn't form a cohesive, understandable, actionable statement about their work to save their lives. They'd go off on some completely pointless technical tangent that had little to do with the problem at hand. Code reviews they participated in ground to a complete fucking halt. Not because they actually addressed meaningful technical issues. No, they wanted to pontificate and show off how much smarter they were. In my not totally hard-data experience, people that maybe didn't have quite the "real tech people" skills but were expressive, capable communicators often actually shipped more meaningful work, more often, and built organizational equity not just for themselves, but for their teammates and managers too. Software development at any scale, like it or not, involves working with other people. In my experience people that go around gatekeeping and using some hilariously subjective ruler to grade "realness" aren't very effective at all.
- 0des 5y ago
  I take it by your confrontational response that their comment hooked you somewhat. I can assure you it's the truth, and though it may or may not have been relevant to you in a way that affected you emotionally, the words ring true in my experience. Those who can do the thing don't mince words about it, the ones who can't need to massage what they're saying a bit to not lay the bad news on you like a ton of bricks; it is natural for people to want to be accepted socially.
  - Tehchops 5y ago
    "Truth" and "rings true in your experience" aren't necessarily overlapping values. Sure, it's a confrontational response, because I've seen too many solid, empathetic, capable individuals run out of tech by toxic gatekeeping bullshit just like this. Then all I'm left to manage and work with are toxic, self-aggrandizing, "um akshually" engineers who rate appearing smarter than others over working well with others and getting things done.
    - 0des 5y ago
      What is the need to interject the word 'manage' in there? Is that a powermove? edit: Have a great day, I'm going to let this one go. Things to do, code to write :)
      - Tehchops 5y ago
        Have a good day as well!
    - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
      I agree that people trying to appear smarter is toxic, at least if done very often. (Even if not done often, maybe it's still toxic, just not a lethal dose.) That isn't what I meant. It really comes down to this: You can't blather at the computer. You have to make very precise statements to the computer. If you can't be precise in your communications, you can't program. That usually spills over into human communications, too. People who can talk to computers can usually talk to humans who can talk to computers, because they can use at least some of the same terms with the same meanings. And they can talk with the same mindset. You can't show off to the computer. You can't get the code to compile or to run by using more flowery wording. Tech people tend to carry that mindset into their communication with each other.
0des 5y ago
100% spot on. You can usually tell on which side of the sales vs tech spectrum someone is on organizationally by this.
- onphonenow 5y ago
  I would add managers who have super inflated views of themselves but not technical so maybe with some insecurities mixed in? Maybe mixed in with all the microaggression / toxic work environment type stuff? The folks who code are usually like, hey, let me show you this, or do you have time to look at this. THe managers, sales etc folks never say this. They will schedule you for long long boring meetings on any topic they can think of.
Mockapapella 5y ago
Not a recruiter, but this has been my experience too
acuozzo 5y ago
> Real tech people don't blather. The issue is that some people confuse being polite with blathering. https://www.mit.edu/~jcb/tact.html https://www.mit.edu/~jcb/tact.html

nsxwolf 5y ago

I personally bristle when someone says "privilege", but I don't think a recruiter should.

onphonenow 5y ago

"Do you have hard data to back that up or is it just anecdotal personal bristling whenever someone says "privilege"?" - Tehchops This is actually a perfect example of this! Let's take a minute here to look at your response. "Do you have hard data to back that up" I literally said "I've found". Folks who go on long winded discussions about privilege do exactly this - redirect, misunderstand, demand impossible things. I didn't say I had hard data, I said this was just my personal experience. I don't need hard data to back up my own experience - it's simply my experience. The "hard data" that you seem interested in is often horrendously weak in this social studies type area. This may be offensive or triggering, but measuring job performance is extremely hard, and measuring it relative to communication styles is harder. This raises a question in my mind, are you unable to evaluate the likelihood that hard data would exist so that it makes sense to demand it and you would believe what I presented if I found some? There may be some poor critical reasoning skills here. "just anecdotal personal bristling whenever someone says "privilege"" Dismissing others experience rather than engaging on the comment. Is your experience positive with folks who communicate like this? Mine is not. The writer is using this over the top over formal language. Their language choice is all a bad sign of ego ego ego. Tech folks are in high demand, they are not gods. "While I very much appreciate the fact that exceptionally talented and engaged recruiters reach out consistently"... "I will be unavailable for further discussion."

Tehchops 5y ago
> Dismissing others experience rather than engaging on the comment. Is your experience positive with folks who communicate like this? Mine is not I believe your original comment was: > Insta-delete if I'm doing hiring... Now who's being dismissive again? ;-) > Folks who go on long winded discussions about privilege do exactly this - redirect, misunderstand, demand impossible things. And I've found folks who respond defensively as you have tend to not reflect on their own privilege, and generally do not respond well to criticism or questioning. Of course... feel free to "dismiss" what I'm saying.