3 ms·

Have you been slighted by engineers in some fashion? Tell me how we have offended you as a class, so that we can improve this tendency. I am genuinely interes

Have you been slighted by engineers in some fashion? Tell me how we have offended you as a class, so that we can improve this tendency. I am genuinely interested.

gknoy 12y ago
While I agree that the GP paints with an overly large brush, I think the core of his argument could be that, as engineers and coders, we think of and create things based on __rules__. Something is either in your collection or isn't. The bridge can hold that much weight or it won't. My program's tests pass or fail. The rocket has enough delta-v to make orbit or doesn't. There is no "maybe" in MANY aspects of what we do as engineers or as programmers. Much of our work involves making sure that rules are kept inviolable, etc. In contrast, acting on empathy often involves deciding to bend, suspend, or redefine rules or exceptions to them. No TV after 6, except on weekends. It's okay to leave time-out if the two year old needs to use the potty. (This has been especially apparent to me as a parent, hence my examples ;)) Un-empathetic behavior by admins or developers of a system like the one described here can probably partly be explained by a thought process like this: - Cheating must never happen, or be ruthlessly punished, to protect the "good" players - We can undo / fix things, but we need some proof, since cheaters could say that they had $ZZZ in our system. - screenshots are about the only proof that a user could provide - Ergo, screenshots required to get things restored. Like most security theater, the goals could very well be good (stop cheaters). The trouble is, in a case like this where the devs/admins were clearly at fault, good customer service should trump that. I think most of us agree that restoring what customers have lost -- even if it means some cheaters get back more than they had -- would restore a lot more goodwill from the community than taking a hard line to prevent cheaters will.
- josephschmoe 12y ago
  I definitely agree - taking a hard line on cheaters is a great way to lose your community, literally. I got featured by Blizzard for my Starcraft II map and banned by an overzealous bot in the same week for "hacking." Tried to contact support, but no one apparently cared. Never played since. This isn't an engineering or moral problem though. It's a business problem. They're clearly making a bad business decision by refusing to acknowledge the importance of active community players over hackers. This problem could have been solved fairly with reasonable rules, but clearly was not.
rayiner 12y ago
Don't take my comment as a slight on engineers. I have an engineering degree, practiced as one, and half my friends are still engineers. But they skew logical/mathematical, and that makes them, generally, less empathetic than average.

Have you been slighted by engineers in some fashion? Tell me how we have offended you as a class, so that we can improve this tendency. I am genuinely interested.

gknoy 12y ago

While I agree that the GP paints with an overly large brush, I think the core of his argument could be that, as engineers and coders, we think of and create things based on __rules__. Something is either in your collection or isn't. The bridge can hold that much weight or it won't. My program's tests pass or fail. The rocket has enough delta-v to make orbit or doesn't. There is no "maybe" in MANY aspects of what we do as engineers or as programmers. Much of our work involves making sure that rules are kept inviolable, etc. In contrast, acting on empathy often involves deciding to bend, suspend, or redefine rules or exceptions to them. No TV after 6, except on weekends. It's okay to leave time-out if the two year old needs to use the potty. (This has been especially apparent to me as a parent, hence my examples ;)) Un-empathetic behavior by admins or developers of a system like the one described here can probably partly be explained by a thought process like this: - Cheating must never happen, or be ruthlessly punished, to protect the "good" players - We can undo / fix things, but we need some proof, since cheaters could say that they had $ZZZ in our system. - screenshots are about the only proof that a user could provide - Ergo, screenshots required to get things restored. Like most security theater, the goals could very well be good (stop cheaters). The trouble is, in a case like this where the devs/admins were clearly at fault, good customer service should trump that. I think most of us agree that restoring what customers have lost -- even if it means some cheaters get back more than they had -- would restore a lot more goodwill from the community than taking a hard line to prevent cheaters will.

josephschmoe 12y ago
I definitely agree - taking a hard line on cheaters is a great way to lose your community, literally. I got featured by Blizzard for my Starcraft II map and banned by an overzealous bot in the same week for "hacking." Tried to contact support, but no one apparently cared. Never played since. This isn't an engineering or moral problem though. It's a business problem. They're clearly making a bad business decision by refusing to acknowledge the importance of active community players over hackers. This problem could have been solved fairly with reasonable rules, but clearly was not.

rayiner 12y ago

Don't take my comment as a slight on engineers. I have an engineering degree, practiced as one, and half my friends are still engineers. But they skew logical/mathematical, and that makes them, generally, less empathetic than average.