3 ms·
Note that this contrasts with BLUF, a good standard for direct, factual communication: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLUF_(communication) https://en.wikipedia.o
by mattxxx 3y ago
Note that this contrasts with BLUF, a good standard for direct, factual communication:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLUF_(communication) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLUF_(communication)
In particular, the parts where you are adding buffers + prefaces ahead of the important content.
That said, non-violent communication is super important, so learning to retract from more direct, factual styles in exchange for a style that make people feel understood and respected as a colleague is important.
Tense situations usually evolve because both parties are adding slight amounts of intensity/unhappiness to the situation iteratively, and the only way to get them back to peaceful is by making commitment to making _the next interaction_ some amount less tense/hostile. Do that repeatedly and you'll get somewhere.
PS: Also Stoicism helps especially with these things... great, practical text on it: "The Practicing Stoic: A Philosophical User's Manual" by Farnsworth
- tptacek 3y agoBLUF ("bottom line up-front") might make a lot of sense in in-person communications, especially regimented ones like the US military (the example from the article). And it's valuable advice for long-form or durable writing. But the constant casual writing ("chat") that characterizes tech work is a different environment with different pitfalls, which message board nerds have known about and discussed for-ev-er. I don't think BLUF squares well with chat environments; it seems like a recipe for being constantly misunderstood and mistrusted.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Teever 3y agoThank you! I've been looking for this term for a while ever since someone posted a blog post about examples of US military memo writing on HN a few years ago. If anyone can remember that link and share it I would love that!