3 ms·

> What would have been a 1:1 over coffee or a corridor huddle now needs a meeting room reservation, and there aren't nearly enough of them to go around. Genuin

> What would have been a 1:1 over coffee or a corridor huddle now needs a meeting room reservation, and there aren't nearly enough of them to go around. Genuinely curious because I’ve yet to encounter this myself - but why would you need a meeting for something like this? Can you not just ask your colleague via slack, teams, etc? Or better yet, can either of you write up a proposal and put out a RFC on it? That way there’s no burden of having a meeting just to discuss something? Sorry if that comes off rude. I’m just genuinely curious what you’d need to meet about.

onion2k 5y ago
Slack is slower. You can cover far more in a face to face meeting (or a video call) in less time. This is easily provable too. Have a 30 minute call with someone, and then have a 30 minute Slack chat with them. It becomes very clear that Slack doesn't work as well for that sort of comms. Slack is brilliant for asynchronous stuff, or very short chats, but it doesn't work for longer things.
- ryanSrich 5y ago
  Slack was just an example though. It could be a google doc. It could be anything written down. In what instance is talking about something better (I guess we’d have to define better but just assume better = retention) than reading about something? If I’m reading about it I can always read it again. In a meeting I’m going to forget 90% of it the moment I walk out the door (or end the zoom meeting).
  - sokoloff 5y ago
    In a collaboratively edited doc (which we should do more of, not less), the 6th person in read a different doc than the 2nd person, yet they both “read the doc” That dynamic is much reduced in a synchronous meeting because everyone’s at the same meeting.
michaelt 5y ago
> Or better yet, can either of you write up a proposal and put out a RFC on it? One of my frustrations with working remotely is things that used to be a two-way discussion on a whiteboard or a live demo become a one-way broadcast of something prepared in advance. There are 'virtual whiteboards', certainly, but none of them are any good.

onion2k 5y ago

Slack is slower. You can cover far more in a face to face meeting (or a video call) in less time. This is easily provable too. Have a 30 minute call with someone, and then have a 30 minute Slack chat with them. It becomes very clear that Slack doesn't work as well for that sort of comms. Slack is brilliant for asynchronous stuff, or very short chats, but it doesn't work for longer things.

ryanSrich 5y ago
Slack was just an example though. It could be a google doc. It could be anything written down. In what instance is talking about something better (I guess we’d have to define better but just assume better = retention) than reading about something? If I’m reading about it I can always read it again. In a meeting I’m going to forget 90% of it the moment I walk out the door (or end the zoom meeting).
- sokoloff 5y ago
  In a collaboratively edited doc (which we should do more of, not less), the 6th person in read a different doc than the 2nd person, yet they both “read the doc” That dynamic is much reduced in a synchronous meeting because everyone’s at the same meeting.

michaelt 5y ago

> Or better yet, can either of you write up a proposal and put out a RFC on it? One of my frustrations with working remotely is things that used to be a two-way discussion on a whiteboard or a live demo become a one-way broadcast of something prepared in advance. There are 'virtual whiteboards', certainly, but none of them are any good.