4 ms·

I think this is a good/important article. Yes, it is a "POV" perspective, and has elements of defensiveness but it is also honest and open... trying to find bet

I think this is a good/important article. Yes, it is a "POV" perspective, and has elements of defensiveness but it is also honest and open... trying to find better communication. >>>impatient and cut me off or interject with a snap interpretation of what I have said so far. So... this sounds like you have already entered into defensiveness by this point, one way or another. Defensiveness tends to be mutual, so perhaps you are also feeling/presenting defensiveness. For example, in your manager meeting... "I simply need you to answer these questions" can easily seem prosecutorial. It is framed in a way that makes you seem good, and him (or his ideas) seem bad. He is making whimsical decisions based on blog posts. You are focusing on real, important issues like usability. This is a frame, a somewhat combative frame... probably/probably loaded with non complimentary assumptions on your part. Whether these assumptions are true, false, exaggerated or whatnot... It creates a passive aggressive frame. These tend to be stubborn frames. It sounds like you are throwing out questions in an attempt to derail/dismiss the idea, not collaborate. Imagine the tables turned around. Next meeting on the subject. This time, your manager "needs to ask questions before forming an opinion:" (1) What is your objection to the react framework? (2) Why is performance selectively concerning only in this context, but not others?...etc. You can see where I am going. These are loaded questions, passive aggressive. Such questions will almost always elicit a a defensive riposte.

denton-scratch 4y ago
> a somewhat combative frame This is a technical discussion we're talking about. In technical discussions, I don't want to faff around with euphemisms, circumlocutions, or fancy pronouns. It's hard enough to be clear in technical discourse, even if you aren't carrying those burdens. I expect people to speak directly, even if on the face of it their utterances might seem rude if spoken in a social context. If a colleague goes in with both fists and feet in a technical discussion, and wins, that doesn't mean they're no longer my friend - it just means I was wrong, and I learned something. Drawing blood in a technical discussion is just part of the life of a technician.
- dalbasal 4y ago
  Technical, nerdy people are often combative in passive aggressive ways. Assuming a "I am the objective one" is often just a blindspot. Everyone is subjective to some extent, and admitting that you are a person with a perspective (as opposed to a neutral observer) is useful for avoiding such tensions. Just admit that you have opinions, and present them as such. "I am concerned that we are taking on a risky project, without understanding the implications. I would like to analytically discuss performance, and plan this product to these performance goals. I prefer an approach based on..." Place yourself into the narrative. Not just other people.
  - denton-scratch 4y ago
    > passive aggressive I think I know what that means; it's kind of pretending to be non-aggressive, while aggressing. I hope that, in a technical discussion, my adversary won't hold back. If they're angry, it's best for me if they tell me. Same if they're strongly opposed to my view. I don't want to have to guess where my adversary is coming from. We're not talking about dating, or getting on with the mother-in-law; it's about technical discussions. There's no reason you shouldn't be aggressive when presenting your view, and then get on fine with your adversary after the discussion's over.
larve 4y ago
Thanks for reading. The thing is, I’m absolutely not passive aggressive when asking these questions. On the contrary, I am engaged, asking them for their point of view and expertise, and actively trying to work in the same direction. I would have zero problems answering the questions you bring up as a hypothetical. In fact these sound like great and interesting questions.

denton-scratch 4y ago

> a somewhat combative frame This is a technical discussion we're talking about. In technical discussions, I don't want to faff around with euphemisms, circumlocutions, or fancy pronouns. It's hard enough to be clear in technical discourse, even if you aren't carrying those burdens. I expect people to speak directly, even if on the face of it their utterances might seem rude if spoken in a social context. If a colleague goes in with both fists and feet in a technical discussion, and wins, that doesn't mean they're no longer my friend - it just means I was wrong, and I learned something. Drawing blood in a technical discussion is just part of the life of a technician.

dalbasal 4y ago
Technical, nerdy people are often combative in passive aggressive ways. Assuming a "I am the objective one" is often just a blindspot. Everyone is subjective to some extent, and admitting that you are a person with a perspective (as opposed to a neutral observer) is useful for avoiding such tensions. Just admit that you have opinions, and present them as such. "I am concerned that we are taking on a risky project, without understanding the implications. I would like to analytically discuss performance, and plan this product to these performance goals. I prefer an approach based on..." Place yourself into the narrative. Not just other people.
- denton-scratch 4y ago
  > passive aggressive I think I know what that means; it's kind of pretending to be non-aggressive, while aggressing. I hope that, in a technical discussion, my adversary won't hold back. If they're angry, it's best for me if they tell me. Same if they're strongly opposed to my view. I don't want to have to guess where my adversary is coming from. We're not talking about dating, or getting on with the mother-in-law; it's about technical discussions. There's no reason you shouldn't be aggressive when presenting your view, and then get on fine with your adversary after the discussion's over.

larve 4y ago

Thanks for reading. The thing is, I’m absolutely not passive aggressive when asking these questions. On the contrary, I am engaged, asking them for their point of view and expertise, and actively trying to work in the same direction. I would have zero problems answering the questions you bring up as a hypothetical. In fact these sound like great and interesting questions.