4 ms·

You'd be surprised how normal this is, historically, among remote-first companies (pre-pandemic). A decade or so ago, I worked at a remote-only company with 16

You'd be surprised how normal this is, historically, among remote-first companies (pre-pandemic). A decade or so ago, I worked at a remote-only company with 1600 employees and we never cammed up. We had a large number of employees with serious medical conditions or other personal issues that prevented them from holding down normal jobs and really appreciated not having to go on video.

notamy 5y ago
> We had a large number of employees with serious medical conditions or other personal issues that prevented them from holding down normal jobs and really appreciated not having to go on video. This is the reason I treasure my current company. The work I do works around my disability perfectly, they don't demand I have video on, they're very understanding of my health issues, ... I got seriously lucky and hope I don't have to leave this position for a long time.
- leaflets2 5y ago
  Can I ask, what's the disability? When a company wants a video meeting, what are, to you, better ways to say "please join the meeting with video, but if you have a disability that makes you not want to use video, that's totally fine"? I hope you're doing ok in spite of the disability
  - notamy 5y ago
    > Can I ask, what's the disability? I would rather not specify, as it is quite personal. Suffice to say that I'm very affected physically and mentally day-to-day, so I'm typically unable to put effort into my appearance. > When a company wants a video meeting, what are, to you, better ways to say "please join the meeting with video, but if you have a disability that makes you not want to use video, that's totally fine"? I'm unsure how to best communicate that; the only thing I can think of is to just state up-front that video is not required. I typically don't have issue with just never turning on a webcam.
    - leaflets2 5y ago
      Ok, then I better understand. Thanks for the reply. > the only thing I can think of is to just state up-front that video is not required Ok :-) Hmm, maybe saying something like "appreciated but not required" -- since it's also good for team building, if the others get to see each others sometimes. Sorry for the late reply
mgkimsal 5y ago
I'm on a couple of remote teams, and set the expectation that I won't be 'camera on' all the time during meetings. My reasons are more practical than privacy oriented. I'm often pacing during meetings, and connected via phone and desktop. I can see and hear what's going on, and can talk back, but when my camera is 'on' it's just constant movement, which distracts folks. Every couple of weeks I'll start a meeting with camera on for a minute or so just to say 'hello' to some folks, let them see I'm still 'here' in some sense, then camera off (usually). It feels useful to have some initial face/camera time to get a sense of the other person, but again, it's not something I generally routinely will leave on. I had a period of a month or so last year where I moved to a Mac mini and... there's no camera. I didn't have a working webcam at all laying around, and it took me a month to bother to get a new one. No one missed anything of value by not seeing my face during that time. :) Over the last 5-6 years, it's only been a noted issue with a handful of folks, and never been a deal breaker. The compromise is 'on' now and then for the start of a meeting. There's a humanizing aspect which is easy to lose sight of, but in most meetings, it's typically not that useful anyway. When there's more than a handful of folks, not all camera boxes can be see (too small, too many), and if/when you're working with a smaller group, there's usually much more value in sharing a document/editor/whatever.
- paulcole 5y ago
  > No one missed anything of value by not seeing my face during that time. :) How do you know this for a fact? You think sharing your face isn’t valuable, why do you think this applies to everyone you work with, too?
  - mgkimsal 5y ago
    Speaking in absolutist terms, I can't know as 'fact', true. The output/quality/pace of the group was about as close as it could be during that period of no camera whatsoever. But the comparison is my normal MO which is camera on a few minutes per week. So the delta wasn't that different to begin with.
    - gkop 5y ago
waylandsmithers 5y ago
Not that long ago conference or regular phone calls with no video at all were the norm and we seemed to get along fine

notamy 5y ago

> We had a large number of employees with serious medical conditions or other personal issues that prevented them from holding down normal jobs and really appreciated not having to go on video. This is the reason I treasure my current company. The work I do works around my disability perfectly, they don't demand I have video on, they're very understanding of my health issues, ... I got seriously lucky and hope I don't have to leave this position for a long time.

leaflets2 5y ago
Can I ask, what's the disability? When a company wants a video meeting, what are, to you, better ways to say "please join the meeting with video, but if you have a disability that makes you not want to use video, that's totally fine"? I hope you're doing ok in spite of the disability
- notamy 5y ago
  > Can I ask, what's the disability? I would rather not specify, as it is quite personal. Suffice to say that I'm very affected physically and mentally day-to-day, so I'm typically unable to put effort into my appearance. > When a company wants a video meeting, what are, to you, better ways to say "please join the meeting with video, but if you have a disability that makes you not want to use video, that's totally fine"? I'm unsure how to best communicate that; the only thing I can think of is to just state up-front that video is not required. I typically don't have issue with just never turning on a webcam.
  - leaflets2 5y ago
    Ok, then I better understand. Thanks for the reply. > the only thing I can think of is to just state up-front that video is not required Ok :-) Hmm, maybe saying something like "appreciated but not required" -- since it's also good for team building, if the others get to see each others sometimes. Sorry for the late reply

mgkimsal 5y ago

I'm on a couple of remote teams, and set the expectation that I won't be 'camera on' all the time during meetings. My reasons are more practical than privacy oriented. I'm often pacing during meetings, and connected via phone and desktop. I can see and hear what's going on, and can talk back, but when my camera is 'on' it's just constant movement, which distracts folks. Every couple of weeks I'll start a meeting with camera on for a minute or so just to say 'hello' to some folks, let them see I'm still 'here' in some sense, then camera off (usually). It feels useful to have some initial face/camera time to get a sense of the other person, but again, it's not something I generally routinely will leave on. I had a period of a month or so last year where I moved to a Mac mini and... there's no camera. I didn't have a working webcam at all laying around, and it took me a month to bother to get a new one. No one missed anything of value by not seeing my face during that time. :) Over the last 5-6 years, it's only been a noted issue with a handful of folks, and never been a deal breaker. The compromise is 'on' now and then for the start of a meeting. There's a humanizing aspect which is easy to lose sight of, but in most meetings, it's typically not that useful anyway. When there's more than a handful of folks, not all camera boxes can be see (too small, too many), and if/when you're working with a smaller group, there's usually much more value in sharing a document/editor/whatever.

paulcole 5y ago
> No one missed anything of value by not seeing my face during that time. :) How do you know this for a fact? You think sharing your face isn’t valuable, why do you think this applies to everyone you work with, too?
- mgkimsal 5y ago
  Speaking in absolutist terms, I can't know as 'fact', true. The output/quality/pace of the group was about as close as it could be during that period of no camera whatsoever. But the comparison is my normal MO which is camera on a few minutes per week. So the delta wasn't that different to begin with.
  - gkop 5y ago

waylandsmithers 5y ago

Not that long ago conference or regular phone calls with no video at all were the norm and we seemed to get along fine