4 ms·

Not only open source. Also anyone taking ownership in companies end up like that. The difference is: The person gets paid and is ideally not emotional involved.

by oaiey 3y ago

markphip 3y ago
It is a fair point, but I think your last sentence hits on the problem. People that contribute regularly to OSS projects are nearly always emotionally invested. It brings a lot of pleasure initially which I think also contributes to the eventual burnout. These are hard problems.
tristor 3y ago
Unfortunately, people who take ownership and accountability are often the same people that take pride in their work, which means they aren’t emotionally detached. As long as you're emotionally attached to your work, burnout is a real risk whether you get paid or not. Ironically, the solution from my perspective is the opposite of most advice. It’s not for everyone to become drudging zombies apathetic about their work and just kicking the can, it’s that more people take pride, ownership, and accountability in all aspects of their lives. Having gone through burnout and a lot of therapy, my conclusion was that my burnout (and I think others too) was caused by being a caring decent person in an uncaring world. There are far too many people who surround all of us who are apathetic and/or incompetent, yet are entrenched, and being “forced” to carry their burden has an amplified effect on the misery we feel when doing that work. When you work with a team that only has accountable, competent, engaged people it becomes energizing rather than draining. Realistically even if I am entirely correct above, this isn’t a solution. This is just a confirmation that in my experience the old adage “hell is other people” is true and the primary driver of burnout.
- jynelson 3y ago
  i think this is partially true, but i hesitate to call people zombies. the vast majority of people in the rust project are competent and engaged. the problem is they have different priorities and collaboration is hard when everything is bottom up. i have some more thoughts on this here: https://tech.lgbt/@jyn/111771440884089084 https://tech.lgbt/@jyn/111771440884089084
  - tristor 3y ago
    > i think this is partially true, but i hesitate to call people zombies. To clarify, I was more responding from the perspective of the workplace rather than the Rust project. That said, I have been an open source contributor off and on since 2003 and my observation has been the situation isn’t much different. In a project, rather than apathetic coworkers, you deal with users of the project that have complaints and expectations but without the ability or motivation to contribute themselves. I imagine Rust has slightly less of this than the consumer-focused projects I have worked on, but people are people at the end of the day. Contributing to any large project is largely thankless because there will always be one more complaint/demand issue, or one more PR from someone that didn’t read the contribution guidelines. It can turn what you’re passionate about into a slog, and while the form may differ, it’s not meaningfully different from having apathetic or incompetent coworkers dragging you down. To be honest, dealing with open source slog is slightly worse, because it takes much longer for the hope to die. Somebody that submits a bad PR seems to care somewhat, it’s not total apathy. Somebody that submits a whiny issue at least demonstrates that they used the project and cared enough to write. But both demand your attention without demonstrating competent contribution in and of themselves. It’s somehow worse than the coworkers that are on an in-office vacation.
    - jynelson 3y ago
      i agree! i hadn't realized you were talking about people who weren't already team members. they're usually well-meaning, but it's true that some drain a lot of contributor time on things that aren't important. rust has a conflict avoidance problem. i think rust could be much more effective at saying no, and saying it more quickly. i want to talk about that in my next blog post.
- pdimitar 3y ago
  > my conclusion was that my burnout (and I think others too) was caused by being a caring decent person in an uncaring world Yikes! That hits way too close to home. You didn't have to attack me like that. In seriousness, this is a very astute and correct observation. Noticed it in myself and several others as well. It really pays off to correct your level of caring with what you see from your superiors and colleagues (and peers, in non-commercial activities).
  - Buttons840 3y ago
    I also see some truth in that insight. A problem I have is I don't know how to work if I don't care. At my last job I tried to not care and succeeded, but then got fired for poor performance. Are there sufficiently productive people who don't care? Or does everyone care, but some hold themselves to impossibly high standards? I don't know how to separate "lower standards" and "stop caring". They are the same to me, because lowering my standards requires not caring about the things that comprise my high standard.
    - pdimitar 3y ago
      Oh, that one is easy IMO. Create a backlog of tasks that you would want to do in a week. Then do it in a month. Not caring doesn't mean slacking off. It means to reduce your output.
    - Dalewyn 3y ago
      >Or does everyone care, but some hold themselves to impossibly high standards? That's your answer right there. Do you know the age old saying "That is above my paygrade."? It means you shouldn't care more than what you are paid to do, which in turn will hopefully prevent you from burning out. >I don't know how to separate "lower standards" and "stop caring". You need to remember that your personal satisfaction ("I did good work!") is independent from your peers' satisfaction ("He did good work!"), and that correlation is not causation. Life is short, draw a clear line between your personal and professional lives and budget your limited capacity for passion appropriately.
      - 3y ago

Not only open source. Also anyone taking ownership in companies end up like that. The difference is: The person gets paid and is ideally not emotional involved.

by oaiey 3y ago

Not only open source. Also anyone taking ownership in companies end up like that. The difference is: The person gets paid and is ideally not emotional involved.

markphip 3y ago

It is a fair point, but I think your last sentence hits on the problem. People that contribute regularly to OSS projects are nearly always emotionally invested. It brings a lot of pleasure initially which I think also contributes to the eventual burnout. These are hard problems.

tristor 3y ago

Unfortunately, people who take ownership and accountability are often the same people that take pride in their work, which means they aren’t emotionally detached. As long as you're emotionally attached to your work, burnout is a real risk whether you get paid or not. Ironically, the solution from my perspective is the opposite of most advice. It’s not for everyone to become drudging zombies apathetic about their work and just kicking the can, it’s that more people take pride, ownership, and accountability in all aspects of their lives. Having gone through burnout and a lot of therapy, my conclusion was that my burnout (and I think others too) was caused by being a caring decent person in an uncaring world. There are far too many people who surround all of us who are apathetic and/or incompetent, yet are entrenched, and being “forced” to carry their burden has an amplified effect on the misery we feel when doing that work. When you work with a team that only has accountable, competent, engaged people it becomes energizing rather than draining. Realistically even if I am entirely correct above, this isn’t a solution. This is just a confirmation that in my experience the old adage “hell is other people” is true and the primary driver of burnout.

jynelson 3y ago
i think this is partially true, but i hesitate to call people zombies. the vast majority of people in the rust project are competent and engaged. the problem is they have different priorities and collaboration is hard when everything is bottom up. i have some more thoughts on this here: https://tech.lgbt/@jyn/111771440884089084 https://tech.lgbt/@jyn/111771440884089084
- tristor 3y ago
  > i think this is partially true, but i hesitate to call people zombies. To clarify, I was more responding from the perspective of the workplace rather than the Rust project. That said, I have been an open source contributor off and on since 2003 and my observation has been the situation isn’t much different. In a project, rather than apathetic coworkers, you deal with users of the project that have complaints and expectations but without the ability or motivation to contribute themselves. I imagine Rust has slightly less of this than the consumer-focused projects I have worked on, but people are people at the end of the day. Contributing to any large project is largely thankless because there will always be one more complaint/demand issue, or one more PR from someone that didn’t read the contribution guidelines. It can turn what you’re passionate about into a slog, and while the form may differ, it’s not meaningfully different from having apathetic or incompetent coworkers dragging you down. To be honest, dealing with open source slog is slightly worse, because it takes much longer for the hope to die. Somebody that submits a bad PR seems to care somewhat, it’s not total apathy. Somebody that submits a whiny issue at least demonstrates that they used the project and cared enough to write. But both demand your attention without demonstrating competent contribution in and of themselves. It’s somehow worse than the coworkers that are on an in-office vacation.
  - jynelson 3y ago
    i agree! i hadn't realized you were talking about people who weren't already team members. they're usually well-meaning, but it's true that some drain a lot of contributor time on things that aren't important. rust has a conflict avoidance problem. i think rust could be much more effective at saying no, and saying it more quickly. i want to talk about that in my next blog post.
pdimitar 3y ago
> my conclusion was that my burnout (and I think others too) was caused by being a caring decent person in an uncaring world Yikes! That hits way too close to home. You didn't have to attack me like that. In seriousness, this is a very astute and correct observation. Noticed it in myself and several others as well. It really pays off to correct your level of caring with what you see from your superiors and colleagues (and peers, in non-commercial activities).
- Buttons840 3y ago
  I also see some truth in that insight. A problem I have is I don't know how to work if I don't care. At my last job I tried to not care and succeeded, but then got fired for poor performance. Are there sufficiently productive people who don't care? Or does everyone care, but some hold themselves to impossibly high standards? I don't know how to separate "lower standards" and "stop caring". They are the same to me, because lowering my standards requires not caring about the things that comprise my high standard.
  - pdimitar 3y ago
    Oh, that one is easy IMO. Create a backlog of tasks that you would want to do in a week. Then do it in a month. Not caring doesn't mean slacking off. It means to reduce your output.
  - Dalewyn 3y ago
    >Or does everyone care, but some hold themselves to impossibly high standards? That's your answer right there. Do you know the age old saying "That is above my paygrade."? It means you shouldn't care more than what you are paid to do, which in turn will hopefully prevent you from burning out. >I don't know how to separate "lower standards" and "stop caring". You need to remember that your personal satisfaction ("I did good work!") is independent from your peers' satisfaction ("He did good work!"), and that correlation is not causation. Life is short, draw a clear line between your personal and professional lives and budget your limited capacity for passion appropriately.
    - 3y ago