The Church of Interruption (2018)
sambleckley.com
The Church of Interruption (2018)
1–10 of 100 posts
Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)
#2Oh my god.
Mirror moment for me.
Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)
#3One thing that always bothers me about this is that interrupters are often seen as bad, while non-interrupters are seen as good. You hear this a lot in the context of engineering meetings - there's Tommy the interrupter who always shouts his thoughts, while Grace the quiet one has lots of intelligent things to say but never gets a chance because people are talking over her.
It's always portrayed as the interrupter's problem - they should stop and let other people speak. And hey, I don't disagree with that. You've probably guessed that I'm an interrupter, but I make an extremely concerted effort to shut my damn gob. But if it's reasonable for me to change my behavior, why can't we expect the non-interrupters to do their part a bit and... interrupt? I'm sure it's uncomfortable for them to do that, but it's uncomfortable for me to keep my mouth shut when you're explaining something that I already grasp, and if I just cut in right now I can save us both a few minutes of conversation that's totally unnecessary.
People then complain that non-interrupters don't get the same praise/promotions/other good things because they're not heard, but at some point isn't that on them? Part of what you're getting paid for is to contribute your thoughts during meetings. If you're not doing that solely because it's uncomfortable, isn't that a weakness for you as an employee?
I'll just reiterate here that I'm not anti-non-interrupter, and I go out of my way to make sure smart people who tend to be quieter get involved in the conversation. That said, I do think this is one of those things where neither side is inherently more right or wrong than the other, but one side gets treated as the bad guy.
Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)
#4One thing that always bothers me about this is that interrupters are often seen as bad, while non-interrupters are seen as good. You hear this a lot in the context of engineering meetings - there's Tommy the interrupter who always shouts his thoughts, while Grace the quiet one has lots of intelligent things to say but never gets a chance because people are talking over her. It's always portrayed as the interrupter's…
Because you’re the aggressor. It’s as simple as that. If you’re hanging out with buddies who like to playfully shove, that’s fine, but it’s on you if you don’t respect someone who doesn’t want to be shoved. You’re welcome to not hangout with people who don’t like being shoved, but that’s on you.
Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)
#5One thing that always bothers me about this is that interrupters are often seen as bad, while non-interrupters are seen as good. You hear this a lot in the context of engineering meetings - there's Tommy the interrupter who always shouts his thoughts, while Grace the quiet one has lots of intelligent things to say but never gets a chance because people are talking over her. It's always portrayed as the interrupter's…
I think that there’s a third way in a meeting, and that’s to have a skilful chair of the meeting ensuring that there’s not one unnecessary dominating voice.
I say this as an interrupter who has been kindly made aware that other people have yet to speak.
Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)
#6One thing that always bothers me about this is that interrupters are often seen as bad, while non-interrupters are seen as good. You hear this a lot in the context of engineering meetings - there's Tommy the interrupter who always shouts his thoughts, while Grace the quiet one has lots of intelligent things to say but never gets a chance because people are talking over her. It's always portrayed as the interrupter's…
What makes you sure that your reserved counterpart isn’t asked to change their behavior as well?
In a healthy work environment, suggestions made to both types of people are usually done privately.
Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)
#7I have a friend who is a Barker, who I am always annoyed at because I am a Meek type and I more often than not cannot finish making my points to her. I do not feel that she listens to me. Why do I still like her?
This article, to me, pairs very well with the other top post on HN right now [1]. Thanks to that article I learned that we feel more connected towards someone the quicker they reply to us [2].
There's no conclusive evidence for my theory here that being an interrupter can also trigger the "connectability" heuristic, but it's certainly worth considering.
[1] https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/p/good-conversation...
Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)
#8One thing that always bothers me about this is that interrupters are often seen as bad, while non-interrupters are seen as good. You hear this a lot in the context of engineering meetings - there's Tommy the interrupter who always shouts his thoughts, while Grace the quiet one has lots of intelligent things to say but never gets a chance because people are talking over her. It's always portrayed as the interrupter's…
Interesting PoV! Thanks for sharing :)
There are different kinds of interrupters
1 - people who want to let you know they know what you're about to say - might save everyone time.
2 - people who aren't interested in what's being said and want to say what they want to say.
3 - people who know better than the person who's talking.
4 - a tangent/aside (when I tangent interrupt I always try when I'm done to ask the person I interrupted to continue).
5 - rephrasing things ("do you mean this?"), asking for confirmation that stuff was understood. If I feel someone's monologuing excessively and losing me because of it (and being bad enough at reading body language to not realise it), I tend to do this (which can turn into a kind of interrogation scenario where I lead by questions, which isn't great, but it's better than having my eyes glaze).
5b - Asking for information about things I don't understand.
On the other side I know some people can speak very slowly, with lots of filler words - it's like they're monopolising the air with...'hmmmm' 'uuuh'...basically nothing, and that can be as annoying as being interrupted. And then you have giant wind-bags.
Conversational dynamics can be tricky things. I don't want anyone getting bummed out if I'm talking to them, and I don't want to lose them. Sometimes my conversation partner isn't so finely attuned to these things so I have to try steer things, and I'm sure people do that with me sometimes as well.
Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)
#9`In short, my friend told me that I am a member of the "Church of Interruption" because I often interrupt him when we are talking. He said that this is efficient because it allows us to both know that we understand each other. However, I asked what the problem is, and he did not answer.`
Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)
#10One thing that always bothers me about this is that interrupters are often seen as bad, while non-interrupters are seen as good. You hear this a lot in the context of engineering meetings - there's Tommy the interrupter who always shouts his thoughts, while Grace the quiet one has lots of intelligent things to say but never gets a chance because people are talking over her. It's always portrayed as the interrupter's…
Because you’re the aggressor. It’s as simple as that. If you’re hanging out with buddies who like to playfully shove, that’s fine, but it’s on you if you don’t respect someone who doesn’t want to be shoved. You’re welcome to not hangout with people who don’t like being shoved, but that’s on you.
Your completely ignored their point and then responded violently towards awillen. There is more to polite conversation than just interruptions.