4 ms·

Counterpoint to the European thing: I recently worked for an all-remote team where almost everyone is Europe based, and there was no humour at all in their mee

Counterpoint to the European thing: I recently worked for an all-remote team where almost everyone is Europe based, and there was no humour at all in their meetings, and very little personal anecdata of any kind. It was very dry and professional, week in week out. I once cracked a light joke (nothing that anyone could find offensive) and it fell very flat. Doing so was obviously out of place. Never made that mistake again. Not just missing humour, but I couldn't discern any way that people formed work-social connections outside of those meetings, even though most of our interactions were over Discord. It was all about the work, and that was minimal as well. Even on Discord it was interesting to see much of the time, people talked past each other, not appearing to understand each other's point, or just saying what they'd worked on with no replies. Even DMs tended to be dry and would end when the question at hand was answered. My attempts to be friendly and curious led nowhere, metaphorically like the flatness of talking in an anechoic chamber. I found it quite depressing and difficult, not because I especially needed work friends, but because I couldn't find a way to get to the "informal real talk mode" about work either. It was difficult to forge the kinds of informal links that make work easier and more effective, and I think everyone's work quality suffered for it because everyone was kind of working on little atomised areas. I saw very little evidence that anyone cared about anyone else's wellbeing either.

s1artibartfast 5y ago
You bring up the really good point that this type of dry conversation to obtain answers only is a terrible environment for curiosity and learning. Relating interest, abstract Concepts and gasp opinions not necessarily specific to the problem at hand is an important Avenue towards growth. You thought the Europeans were the dry ones?
- jlokier 5y ago
  > You thought the Europeans were the dry ones? Actually yes. Although the teams I worked with were almost all people in Europe, one was from USA, and another was in Canada (though guessing from their name, perhaps their family came from eastern Europe). Those two were people I enjoyed listening to more, and felt if I reached out it would be feasible to have a bit more depth to the conversation. They managed to sound more interesting and emotionally present than the others, both in writing and verbally, and if I had a choice I'd choose them to work with in future. It may not be a coincidence that they were among the most technically skilled people as well. I noticed a correlation between high technical skill and pleasant and thoughtful people, though by no means was that universal. EDIT: After thinking over the above reply, I realised that "dry" isn't the right word for the distinction I'm using. "Humourless" and "entirely work oriented", perhaps. There were some Europeans that weren't dry, they had strongly expressed (but dubious) technical opinions and weren't afraid to say them. But that wasn't humour, and tended to imply someone else was wrong/stupid/incompetent, which imho was unhelpful for fostering prosocial work relationships.

s1artibartfast 5y ago

You bring up the really good point that this type of dry conversation to obtain answers only is a terrible environment for curiosity and learning. Relating interest, abstract Concepts and gasp opinions not necessarily specific to the problem at hand is an important Avenue towards growth. You thought the Europeans were the dry ones?

jlokier 5y ago
> You thought the Europeans were the dry ones? Actually yes. Although the teams I worked with were almost all people in Europe, one was from USA, and another was in Canada (though guessing from their name, perhaps their family came from eastern Europe). Those two were people I enjoyed listening to more, and felt if I reached out it would be feasible to have a bit more depth to the conversation. They managed to sound more interesting and emotionally present than the others, both in writing and verbally, and if I had a choice I'd choose them to work with in future. It may not be a coincidence that they were among the most technically skilled people as well. I noticed a correlation between high technical skill and pleasant and thoughtful people, though by no means was that universal. EDIT: After thinking over the above reply, I realised that "dry" isn't the right word for the distinction I'm using. "Humourless" and "entirely work oriented", perhaps. There were some Europeans that weren't dry, they had strongly expressed (but dubious) technical opinions and weren't afraid to say them. But that wasn't humour, and tended to imply someone else was wrong/stupid/incompetent, which imho was unhelpful for fostering prosocial work relationships.