Please don't say just hello in chat (2013) • Hacker News Board

Re: Please don't say just hello in chat (2013)

#281

Post by zamalek » Sat, Jan 23, 2021, 6:53 PM UTC

jasode wrote: post #33

>People who do this are generally trying to be polite by not jumping right into the request, like one would in person or on the phone - and that's great! Different people have different reasons but I notice that many people that do a naked "hi" / "hey" are trying to see if the receiver is present for an immediate reply. In other words, the sender deliberately wants a synchronous instead of asynchronous convo. They do…

> In other words, the sender deliberately wants a synchronous instead of asynchronous convo.

"Hello" is a pretty bad negotiation protocol for that. At best, the person is online and can initiate synchronous communication (but has to sit around and wait before they can start thinking about your desired context), at worst you get stuck in an endless loop of "Sure, you there?" Furthermore, what if the person wasn't available right now? Do they simply ignore your "Hello?" That would seem more rude. In addition, and ultimately, if the sync communication negotiation fails, you're probably going to have to fall back to async; so you may as well leave the door open to that.

"Hey, just want to chat quickly about that thing, if you're not around I'll ask Alice." That contains the full description of what you want, is concise, and will allow the recipient to not waste their time.

The way I see IM is that every conversation starts with what would be a subject line in an email if a longer conversation is required (whether sync or async). This gets everyone thinking about the context right away and improves your ability to search for that conversation in the log.

Re: Please don't say just hello in chat (2013)

#282

Post by benhurmarcel » Sat, Jan 23, 2021, 6:53 PM UTC

andai wrote: post #250

benhurmarcel wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish you could just configure the app to not notify you for a first "hello" message, unless it's been 5 minutes or something. While I'm at it, it shouldn't send you multiple notifications for messages arriving in short sequence.

> multiple notifications for messages arriving in short sequence Oh god, I know people who average three words per line, and I just have them permanently muted so my screen doesn't fill up with a giant stack of shit. But then I never hear when they message me, which isn't ideal either, because sometimes it's important.

This is a common issue, but should be solved by software. The app just shouldn't notify you several times in less than X seconds. Then it wouldn't be a problem at all.

Re: Please don't say just hello in chat (2013)

#283

Post by Arainach » Sat, Jan 23, 2021, 6:54 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #277

Arainach wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then just say "never mind, figured it out" when it's no longer relevant.

There is another consideration: composing an inquiry designed for asynchronous comms requires a lot more effort than synchronous. If I know the exchange is going to be synchronous I can be a lot more sloppy in my formulation because I know I'll be there to clarify ambiguities, provide missing info, etc. in real time. If it's going to be asynchronous I have to put a lot more effort into making sure that the inquiry is…

This is disrespectful of the time of the person you're talking to. Taking the time to write a good question is important. This is true in synchronous and asynchronous conversation.

A class of problem as big as the "No Hello" problem is asking questions that are way too specific, like "How do I get a list of which windows are on which desktops" when the actual question is "How should I move a window to another desktop" and the person asking the question is too deep into what they assume is the right path.

The person answering your question is doing you a favor; please be respectful of them.

Re: Please don't say just hello in chat (2013)

#284

Post by eganist » Sat, Jan 23, 2021, 6:55 PM UTC

oauea wrote: post #234

eganist wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably, yes, but not always. It depends on the matter.

If you didn't, then I'll be forced to assume it's not important. At least you clearly didn't care enough to put in a tiny amount of effort.

> If you didn't, then I'll be forced to assume it's not important. At least you clearly didn't care enough to put in a tiny amount of effort.

That's your prerogative, but it also exposes you to corporate risk if it in fact was a sensitive matter with urgency and it's deemed that the necessary communication attempts were made.

Deciding right off the top that communication isn't urgent takes precedent. If it's the first time they're messaging you, best not to chance the urgency until they have a track record with you.

Re: Please don't say just hello in chat (2013)

#285

Post by antisthenes » Sat, Jan 23, 2021, 6:56 PM UTC

kempbellt wrote: post #247

joshmanders wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Online status does not mean I am available, the online status tells my team that I am indeed, in my work day and they can message me and get a response when I'm actually available. Clocking in physically at your job tells your employer you're working, but it doesn't mean you're available immediately for their attention.

If your status is "Online" it gives the impression that you are simply online, sure. If you are "Online" on an team-based instant messenger application, it also gives a certain impression... Life happens, focus on work happens, bathroom breaks happen... Almost no one is available "immediately" all the time. But if you regularly show yourself as online and cannot respond within a reasonable amount of time (a couple of…

> Life happens, focus on work happens, bathroom breaks happen... Almost no one is available "immediately" all the time. But if you regularly show yourself as online and cannot respond within a reasonable amount of time (a couple of hours?) to questions/concerns that coworkers send to you, then why are you "Online"?

I think you're actually somewhat agreeing with the above poster.

To me, being online means I will respond to your concern as soon as I can context switch to your problem cheaply - usually within 30 minutes, or maybe even instantly if you caught me coming off of a lunch/bathroom break.

> Is it difficult to close the app, change your status, or simply respond with "Hey, super busy today. I'll get back to you on this tomorrow", simply for the sake of building good team interactions?

I think it's a good habit to build. For example if it's nearing the end of the work day, and you have enough work to do, setting yourself to busy should indicate people not to expect your response until the next day.

Re: Please don't say just hello in chat (2013)

#286

Post by eganist » Sat, Jan 23, 2021, 6:57 PM UTC

airstrike wrote: post #245

eganist wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Now, if Mike from Accounting wants to talk urgently, I may not be available because I have my own list of urgent things to tackle. I will try to carve out time and prioritize his request, but I am in no way committed to his personal sense of urgency. That's fine, and that's for you to decide. But Mike from Accounting may have a reason to withhold the details for a different channel or to mitigate against other pote…

Mike doesn't need to share the details. He just needs to tell me what it's about and ask when I'm free. I'll be happy to carve out time in my schedule and offer up, say, 30 minutes at 2pm. If he needs to talk sooner than that, he can make a counter proposal and say "this is really urgent, can you talk sooner?" and I will weigh it accordingly Overcommunicating is better than undercommunicating.

> Mike doesn't need to share the details. He just needs to tell me what it's about and ask when I'm free. I'll be happy to carve out time in my schedule and offer up, say, 30 minutes at 2pm. If he needs to talk sooner than that, he can make a counter proposal and say "this is really urgent, can you talk sooner?" and I will weigh it accordingly

I think this thread has reached its apex.

Not every message's contents ("what it's about") can be conveyed asynchronously, but I'm failing to communicate this, so I think I'll bow out.

Thanks for working with me on this.

Re: Please don't say just hello in chat (2013)

#287

Post by eganist » Sat, Jan 23, 2021, 6:58 PM UTC

Arainach wrote: post #262

eganist wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless the matter has an ephemerality requirement, in which case I message seeking immediate availability and then transition to a phone call. A signal call if the matter needs to be both ephemeral and confidential. Insisting on asynchronous communication for All The Things™ concerns me in that it shows that a person isn't adaptable to varying criticalities and sensitivities. The same goes for insisting on synchronou…

Even in that case, "Are you around for a call?" gets the point across far better than "Hey, are you there?" Most people don't need to deal with ephemeral requirements. I've been in software for over a decade at a variety of businesses, and without fail the only times someone's been worried about talking over discoverable mediums they've been considering something that's anticompetitive or potentially illegal. The vas…

> Even in that case, "Are you around for a call?" gets the point across far better than "Hey, are you there?"

Can I ask the difference between these two in practical terms?

Edit:

> the only times someone's been worried about talking over discoverable mediums they've been considering something that's anticompetitive or potentially illegal.

Interesting. In my case, it's without fail been circumstances where message control (specifically anti-forwarding) was paramount. I suppose it boils down to differences in our roles.

Re: Please don't say just hello in chat (2013)

#288

Post by antisthenes » Sat, Jan 23, 2021, 7:00 PM UTC

jt2190 wrote: post #261

AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree, because putting the whole request in at the outset puts the responsibility on me, even if I'm not available. Consider the following exchange: Co-worker: Hi, AA. Me: Hello. Co-worker: I need some help, are you available? Co-worker: Well, I'm actually past my shift, and you probably saw me available because I was reading an email. Can I hit you up in the morning? Coworker: Sure. ---VS----- Co-worker: Hi, AA…

You’re describing a behavior that is highly frowned upon in the Israeli Defense Force, here described to Joel Spolsky by Tamir Nitzan: > As for the expressions (pronounced “rosh katan” – little head, vs. “rosh gadol” – big head). This expression comes from the IDF, and as most military language, doesn’t quite translate into normal language. A “rosh katan” (literally “little head”, and I actually think it is the origi…

Keep in mind that variant 2 takes an exorbitant amount of effort compared to variant 1.

If you're multitasking and have other responsibilities, it's not always prudent to give every task such detailed attention, especially if it requires you to context switch.

It may work in the army, where you don't really have much creative/deep work going on, but I've seen those expectations fail in the workplace.

Re: Please don't say just hello in chat (2013)

#289

Post by codeulike » Sat, Jan 23, 2021, 7:02 PM UTC

tene wrote: post #275

codeulike wrote: post #85

I dont agree with this. Its good to be polite. Also if you throw your question into the chat without first verifying that they are seeing it and responding then you can end up asking the question, then they dont see it, then it hangs around for ages, then they see it hours later when it might not be relevant anymore and it causes confusion. Saying hello is fine, and polite, our social instincts are pretty good genera…

If you believe the comments of people advocating nohello are about "lost productivity", I recommend you try re-reading this comment thread with a bit more empathy, looking for the emotions behind the comments. You mention our social instincts. For a lot of people, nohello is exactly what our social instincts are pushing for. For us, a bare "hello" without any context or information is uncomfortable, and feels rather…

The website itself mentions lost productivity, I was responding to that.

So despite best intentions, you're actually just making the other person wait for you to phrase your question, which is lost productivity

Re: Please don't say just hello in chat (2013)

#290

Post by ogre_codes » Sat, Jan 23, 2021, 7:02 PM UTC

kempbellt wrote: post #192

joshmanders wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you can't play nicely on a team then maybe a different job is for you? This is a bullshit copout. It's a cultural issue if people cannot be respectful of their co-workers time. It is very common that if something is important to use important modes of communication such as phone calls. My team for example is very asynchronous because that is our culture. Our team is located all over the country and some people i…

No, the bullshit copout is showing that you are available when you are not, to give the illusion that you are working I have nothing but respect for my coworkers personal time. I couldn't care less, personally, if you need to take hours, days, weeks, or even months off of work for whatever reason. Do what you need to do. However, if you are on Slack and suggesting to people you are available when you are not, that is…

> No, the bullshit copout is showing that you are available when you are not, to give the illusion that you are working

Sounds like your idea of how to use Slack is about 180 degrees out from mine. For my team, people put things on Slack and reply when they have time/ energy or holes in their flow. Sometimes you get an immediate reply, often its not for 10 minutes or an hour.

I'm curious what kind of job allows you to fool people into thinking you are working be being available in Slack? Certainly software developers can't get away with that. Regardless of what your Slack hours are, you need to deliver bug fixes and new code.