3 ms·

I couldn't get through the whole insufferable mess, but I'm going to argue with this point. > The first type, my favourite commenters, whose grim-faced no-nons

I couldn't get through the whole insufferable mess, but I'm going to argue with this point. > The first type, my favourite commenters, whose grim-faced no-nonsense corporate visages grace standups across the world. Thanks to their fearless leadership and keen business sense, I have it on good authority that all projects are scheduled to move from red status to green status despite all those risks unfortunately materializing, which is no one's fault in particular. Despite the various challenges we have faced over the years and lack of forward progress, I think this retro is the one where things are going to change. I have someone like this on my team, and let me tell you, I _adore_ this person. He is not an idiot. We tell him the unvarnished truth about what is going on, and he massages it into something that is closer to what upper management wants to hear. It actually takes a lot of intelligence to do this in such a way that it isn't blatantly dishonest and also doesn't get your project cancelled. Being brutally honest with upper management about the status of your project is a sure fire way to _lose your job_ at many companies. And by the way, the people he's reporting to are _also_ not idiots and realize that the message is being massaged and have to read between the lines and so on up the chain. I'm going to close with this quote: > But most days, if you’re aware enough to give yourself a choice, you can choose to look differently at this fat, dead-eyed, over-made-up lady who just screamed at her kid in the checkout line. Maybe she’s not usually like this. Maybe she’s been up three straight nights holding the hand of a husband who is dying of bone cancer. Or maybe this very lady is the low-wage clerk at the motor vehicle department, who just yesterday helped your spouse resolve a horrific, infuriating, red-tape problem through some small act of bureaucratic kindness. Of course, none of this is likely, but it’s also not impossible. It just depends what you want to consider. If you’re automatically sure that you know what reality is, and you are operating on your default setting, then you, like me, probably won’t consider possibilities that aren’t annoying and miserable. But if you really learn how to pay attention, then you will know there are other options. It will actually be within your power to experience a crowded, hot, slow, consumer-hell type situation as not only meaningful, but sacred, on fire with the same force that made the stars: love, fellowship, the mystical oneness of all things deep down. > Not that that mystical stuff is necessarily true. The only thing that’s capital-T True is that you get to decide how you’re gonna try to see it. -- David Foster Wallace

mwenge 3y ago
Sounds like the thermocline of truth: https://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/15/the-wetware-crisis-the-themocline-of-truth/ https://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/15/the-wetware-crisis-the-...
cassepipe 3y ago
The author about a person claiming seriously that they drive better when they're drunk when coming back from a party : > Then there is the third kind of person who, upon reading anything like the quote above, immediately insists that the complainant must secretly be the insufferable one, because actually smart people don't experience frustration for reasons unknown. The implication is that they're the smart ones because they live in a world where the ultimate marker of intelligence is not the ability to discern sound action from unsound, but instead a grotesque meta-intelligence which manifests as the inexplicable belief that no action is ever deserving of contempt, and any deviation from this belief is a humility problem. Their judgement usually comes with a vomitous attempt at a cutting remark which, coming from individuals best described as a sentient LinkedIn posts, invariably morphs into the flaccid "you aren't as smart as you think you are" or "you sound insufferable". I personally love the D.F Wallace quote from "Is this water ?" and I generally don't get annoyed at people from underperforming at some task (minor driving/logical mistakes), I really try to take into account one's reality by having empathy. But I don't think this contradictory with calling out stupidity when it could put you or other people in danger and I think the drink and drive situation imagined by the author is one. You don't need to condemn people to call out stupidity but you should call it out as such.
theamk 3y ago
I am pretty sure author is not thinking about teams talking to upper management, but rather upper management talking to teams, claiming the project will succeed while it is really on the failing track and needs urgent intervention. I've seen this once in my career: one of the project directors claiming the certain project is fine in the face of opposite evidence, doing nothing while it went further and further off-track, until the customers (who have seen the status reports) asked for a deliverable and everything just collapsed. This was very amusing to see from the distance, but if I really cared about the project I would be very disheartened. (But I would not call this director "moron" - they got their 7-figure salary for few years, and while they did lose their position, I am sure they will eventually find a new project to lead) Re 2nd part of your message: 100% agree, never judge people by a single event, everyone has a bad day sometimes. However if that's your team-mate and you have a few month worth of experience working with them...

mwenge 3y ago

Sounds like the thermocline of truth: https://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/15/the-wetware-crisis-the-themocline-of-truth/ https://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/15/the-wetware-crisis-the-...

cassepipe 3y ago

The author about a person claiming seriously that they drive better when they're drunk when coming back from a party : > Then there is the third kind of person who, upon reading anything like the quote above, immediately insists that the complainant must secretly be the insufferable one, because actually smart people don't experience frustration for reasons unknown. The implication is that they're the smart ones because they live in a world where the ultimate marker of intelligence is not the ability to discern sound action from unsound, but instead a grotesque meta-intelligence which manifests as the inexplicable belief that no action is ever deserving of contempt, and any deviation from this belief is a humility problem. Their judgement usually comes with a vomitous attempt at a cutting remark which, coming from individuals best described as a sentient LinkedIn posts, invariably morphs into the flaccid "you aren't as smart as you think you are" or "you sound insufferable". I personally love the D.F Wallace quote from "Is this water ?" and I generally don't get annoyed at people from underperforming at some task (minor driving/logical mistakes), I really try to take into account one's reality by having empathy. But I don't think this contradictory with calling out stupidity when it could put you or other people in danger and I think the drink and drive situation imagined by the author is one. You don't need to condemn people to call out stupidity but you should call it out as such.

theamk 3y ago

I am pretty sure author is not thinking about teams talking to upper management, but rather upper management talking to teams, claiming the project will succeed while it is really on the failing track and needs urgent intervention. I've seen this once in my career: one of the project directors claiming the certain project is fine in the face of opposite evidence, doing nothing while it went further and further off-track, until the customers (who have seen the status reports) asked for a deliverable and everything just collapsed. This was very amusing to see from the distance, but if I really cared about the project I would be very disheartened. (But I would not call this director "moron" - they got their 7-figure salary for few years, and while they did lose their position, I am sure they will eventually find a new project to lead) Re 2nd part of your message: 100% agree, never judge people by a single event, everyone has a bad day sometimes. However if that's your team-mate and you have a few month worth of experience working with them...