4 ms·

This is a very stylistic and subjective take. Not all workplace cultures and not all people prefer to communicate this way, and many of us resent the "YTA" labe

This is a very stylistic and subjective take. Not all workplace cultures and not all people prefer to communicate this way, and many of us resent the "YTA" label that is applied to a direct communication style. I don't work for praise, and I maintain high standards as a matter of personal professionalism. I couldn't care less whether my colleagues recognize me, and business leaders don't care about your effort; they care about the bottom line. It's not surprising that your video relates to children. This sort of feelings-driven approach has no place in a professional workplace full of adults who are all expected to know why they're there, the terms of their employment, and what objective they're working towards. In fact I find it somewhat demeaning to have the default communication style be so childish. Did you notice that "Why didn't you do it this way?" is rather less verbose than your alternative? This holds true in the general case too: communication tailored to your audience is much more verbose, and therefore laborious to produce, than communication written following the ABCs - accuracy, brevity, clarity. Imagine all the time that such organizations waste rewording things ad infinitum. Managing emotional state should be the responsibility of the listener/reader, while the communicator's job should be to get their idea across as clearly and concisely as possible. It's just more efficient that way.

johnnyanmac 3y ago
>Did you notice that "Why didn't you do it this way?" is rather less verbose than your alternative? "your code sucks" is even more concise. We can take a minute out of our time to elaborate and clarify, and of course not result to insults. >Managing emotional state should be the responsibility of the listener/reader, while the communicator's job should be to get their idea across as clearly and concisely as possible. And this mindset is exactly what leads to meltdowns in certain industries. "it's not my fault you feel bad about my abuse". People still want to generally feel like they belong and if all you put out is criticism they will find that belonging elsewhere. You can't be negative 100% of the time and be surprised when morale is down.
- gabereiser 3y ago
  “FU” is even more concise. I don’t want to work in an environment where engineers actively put each other down instead of helping achieve goals.
- thegrimmest 3y ago
  > "your code sucks" is even more concise. It doesn't convey the same meaning at all though. One is a constructive criticism, one is not. Asking about reasoning for discarding alternative solutions is a perfectly standard part of any review process. It doesn't need to be further elongated and stylized to reduce directness. > "it's not my fault you feel bad about my abuse" Nowhere in my post did I justify abuse. Ad hominem is generally out of bounds in professional communication. I'm defending a more direct style that communicates the same message, not a difference message all together. I'm not saying that praise isn't useful feedback, only that it shouldn't be used in place of criticism as the parent post suggested. A submission is either adequate or not, and a review finding a submission inadequate should lay out its reasoning as clearly as possible. If you're consistently authoring inadequate contributions, the onus is on you to figure out why, and negative emotion is a powerful tool to motivate an individual to do so. The same applies to teams and organizations that fail to meet their objectives. After all these emotions didn't evolve for no reason or in a vacuum. > People still want to generally feel like they belong Some people do, some people understand that they're fulfilling a professional function in exchange for compensation and don't see that their feelings have anything to do with it.
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    Have you noticed that the people advocating for emotional coddling in this thread also seem to have trouble with nuance? They pose this false dichotomy of "Wow I really love this but..." vs "This sucks go fuck yourself" Simply being direct and forward without wrapping your words with empty praise or naked insults doesn't seem to be an option they recognize.
    - johnnyanmac 3y ago
      'I apologize for such a long letter - I didn't have time to write a short one.' - Mark Twain I also notice many people advocating "directness" tend to be bad with words. You may be paid to code, but you're still a professional expected to know how to communicate with peers and everyone else involved. Take time in both your craft and words.

johnnyanmac 3y ago

>Did you notice that "Why didn't you do it this way?" is rather less verbose than your alternative? "your code sucks" is even more concise. We can take a minute out of our time to elaborate and clarify, and of course not result to insults. >Managing emotional state should be the responsibility of the listener/reader, while the communicator's job should be to get their idea across as clearly and concisely as possible. And this mindset is exactly what leads to meltdowns in certain industries. "it's not my fault you feel bad about my abuse". People still want to generally feel like they belong and if all you put out is criticism they will find that belonging elsewhere. You can't be negative 100% of the time and be surprised when morale is down.

gabereiser 3y ago
“FU” is even more concise. I don’t want to work in an environment where engineers actively put each other down instead of helping achieve goals.
thegrimmest 3y ago
> "your code sucks" is even more concise. It doesn't convey the same meaning at all though. One is a constructive criticism, one is not. Asking about reasoning for discarding alternative solutions is a perfectly standard part of any review process. It doesn't need to be further elongated and stylized to reduce directness. > "it's not my fault you feel bad about my abuse" Nowhere in my post did I justify abuse. Ad hominem is generally out of bounds in professional communication. I'm defending a more direct style that communicates the same message, not a difference message all together. I'm not saying that praise isn't useful feedback, only that it shouldn't be used in place of criticism as the parent post suggested. A submission is either adequate or not, and a review finding a submission inadequate should lay out its reasoning as clearly as possible. If you're consistently authoring inadequate contributions, the onus is on you to figure out why, and negative emotion is a powerful tool to motivate an individual to do so. The same applies to teams and organizations that fail to meet their objectives. After all these emotions didn't evolve for no reason or in a vacuum. > People still want to generally feel like they belong Some people do, some people understand that they're fulfilling a professional function in exchange for compensation and don't see that their feelings have anything to do with it.
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  Have you noticed that the people advocating for emotional coddling in this thread also seem to have trouble with nuance? They pose this false dichotomy of "Wow I really love this but..." vs "This sucks go fuck yourself" Simply being direct and forward without wrapping your words with empty praise or naked insults doesn't seem to be an option they recognize.
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    'I apologize for such a long letter - I didn't have time to write a short one.' - Mark Twain I also notice many people advocating "directness" tend to be bad with words. You may be paid to code, but you're still a professional expected to know how to communicate with peers and everyone else involved. Take time in both your craft and words.