"eh, this isn't so bad, heavy handed use of the fact they're not negotiating apparently but fair enough" *CEO stops talking... extremely cringe workers dancing

"eh, this isn't so bad, heavy handed use of the fact they're not negotiating apparently but fair enough" *CEO stops talking... extremely cringe workers dancing with a greenscreen backdrop... google meet "no one else is here; because we are all in person now!" and... their interpretation of the lyrics to the background song*. Wow. What a close, awful. Truly awful. -- However to defend them a little, I personally have noticed that the people who routinely come to the office tend to be better informed and have more realistic expectations of what is possible. It's true that being in-person can paper over communication gaps, and you can argue that those gaps shouldn't exist; but they do. Additionally, while I am CTO of a remote-first company there starts becoming a knowledge and culture imbalance with the people who are capable of going to the office from time-to-time. It's also true that we need a lot of positive interactions as humans, and we tend to have micro-positive interactions more often in person, usually when we reach out to someone over text chat or have a meeting it's somewhat negative. My psychologist once told me it takes 9 good interactions to offset 1 bad one, which is probably not grounded in science but I think the proportions are something like that; and it seems like we are more prone to communicate more often negatively if there is any friction in making that communication. I would like us to have some form of strongly flexible work, but I am not certain that this is possible... it's essentially "worst of both worlds" where we have an expensive office that is barely used and people can't live where they really want to. I guess co-working is the way to solve the former, but it doesn't help with the latter. Though co-working spaces can be as expensive for 1 week as taking a whole month anyway. :(