Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think people forget that the written word has a tendency to come across stern unless you make an effort to soften it. I know I forget this. There have been numerous times even here on HN where people have thought I was being critical or argumentative when that wasn't remotely what I was trying to communicate.
It can be difficult to fine-tune the level of formality. Maybe another application for LLMs? "Conversation softener"
How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole
111–120 of 304 posts
Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole
#112> TRY TO SOUND FRIENDLY. > Say "please" and "thank you"... use emojis... I'll add to this one -- use exclamation points! It's actually ridiculous how effective all these little things are. In my experience, men, engineers, and especially engineers who are men tend to think of this as unnecessary fluff. They often decline to add these little social niceties because to them, they sound inauthentic. That's not a charact…
A: Hey, it looks like there is this and that issue that is caused by one of your submissions. Can you fix it?
B: Sure
A: Thanks!
Was that thanks genuine? Or sarcastic because A spent half a day trying to figure out what is going onRe: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole
#113Something I think is missing from this list: make a sacrifice for the sake of the other person. If trust has been damaged, it might take more than just talk to repair it. You may need to give the other person part of what they want as a gesture of good will. I've seen this go a long way in certain situations. Of course, this comes with some caveats. For example, if there's a power imbalance in a damaged relationship,…
Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole
#114Something I think is missing from this list: make a sacrifice for the sake of the other person. If trust has been damaged, it might take more than just talk to repair it. You may need to give the other person part of what they want as a gesture of good will. I've seen this go a long way in certain situations. Of course, this comes with some caveats. For example, if there's a power imbalance in a damaged relationship,…
Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole
#115I use "communication snippets" or "fillers" for example > Person A: “Hey, do you have any idea why this number is low? It’s a mystery … nobody I’ve talked to yet seems to know.” is really long I just say > curious; why is that number low? other prefixes I use are: 1. adding to the discussion 2. for discussion 3. low pri, no need to respond 4. neutral 5. nonactionable 6. sharing opinion https://www.notion.so/aizatto/c…
"Plainly, we discovered our vocal expression was not enough to convey the feelings of our conversations to other species."
I never noticed the analogy before between Elcor and written/online communication. Now I'm wondering if it was intended by the game's writers.
Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting! If we can be honest with one another though, your comment reads to me as not just insincere, but condescending. This might be cultural more than ..'genderal' - I was hearing echoes of 'thank you so much! You're so welcome!' familiar from even the most mundane interactions in the US. (It's quite jarring when you say 'thanks', for having been sold something in a shop say, expecting to leave it at that, to…
I understand your point about the (theoretical) equal split between styles, so why close one or the other. But I think you've landed on choosing your own way, when really you should try and match the vocal tone of the other person. After all the point of communicating is to get the other person receptive to your point. And this goes both ways, I think overly perky and chipper people need to understand introverts and…
If you’re invested in getting something out of a conversational partner, it’s obviously best to write in a way that sounds like a thought they, themselves, could have had— in fact, are having. And contra 'ketzo’s original point, I deeply appreciate that so many we-have-to-say-mostly male tech stakeholders purposely don’t massage their language that much, and thereby make their brains that much easier to hijack.
I bring my effusively positive personality to HN largely because I don’t have any real motive or theory of change, other than possibly making it a slightly more comfortable environment for people who will read my comments precisely as written.
Oh, I’m so curious if this comment sounds more sincere to the reader :)
Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole
#117> TRY TO SOUND FRIENDLY. > Say "please" and "thank you"... use emojis... I'll add to this one -- use exclamation points! It's actually ridiculous how effective all these little things are. In my experience, men, engineers, and especially engineers who are men tend to think of this as unnecessary fluff. They often decline to add these little social niceties because to them, they sound inauthentic. That's not a charact…
! can easily mean sarcasm A: Hey, it looks like there is this and that issue that is caused by one of your submissions. Can you fix it? B: Sure A: Thanks! Was that thanks genuine? Or sarcastic because A spent half a day trying to figure out what is going on
Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole
#118I use "communication snippets" or "fillers" for example > Person A: “Hey, do you have any idea why this number is low? It’s a mystery … nobody I’ve talked to yet seems to know.” is really long I just say > curious; why is that number low? other prefixes I use are: 1. adding to the discussion 2. for discussion 3. low pri, no need to respond 4. neutral 5. nonactionable 6. sharing opinion https://www.notion.so/aizatto/c…
Not a criticism: this reminds me of Elcor speech in the Mass Effect trilogy, eg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1PKFo1fYCA "Plainly, we discovered our vocal expression was not enough to convey the feelings of our conversations to other species." I never noticed the analogy before between Elcor and written/online communication. Now I'm wondering if it was intended by the game's writers.
Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole
#119> TRY TO SOUND FRIENDLY. > Say "please" and "thank you"... use emojis... I'll add to this one -- use exclamation points! It's actually ridiculous how effective all these little things are. In my experience, men, engineers, and especially engineers who are men tend to think of this as unnecessary fluff. They often decline to add these little social niceties because to them, they sound inauthentic. That's not a charact…
As an engineer, I’ve gotten used to being told off for …using exclamation points, or not using then actually, or using them a little. Apparently an exclamation point on a joke makes it aggressive. And at one age, I got popular, muscular. That’s long gone now, but when I was, I could write whatever I wanted and people didn’t find it offensive. I found it funny when I discovered that people no longer told me off for wh…
It's about who said it and their status.
Your status lowered and all of the sudden your "tone" was off.
Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole
#120> TRY TO SOUND FRIENDLY. > Say "please" and "thank you"... use emojis... I'll add to this one -- use exclamation points! It's actually ridiculous how effective all these little things are. In my experience, men, engineers, and especially engineers who are men tend to think of this as unnecessary fluff. They often decline to add these little social niceties because to them, they sound inauthentic. That's not a charact…
Surprised to see emoji. I feel like those almost always come across insincere when they're not expected. Idk why, maybe I'm the odd one.
Imagine being in a spot to review a new hire's PR and you've barely interacted with them before this encounter.
A reply of "Your method technically works but next time try xyz instead. It's more efficient. ;)" is extremely hostile in my mind. That phrasing is already over the top horrendous but the ;) amplifies it by 10x.
As for a breakdown of why I think it's horrendous:
"Your method"
I think if I were really in this spot I'd probably reply with something like: "Hey, I ran your solution and it's working nicely. Thanks a lot! By the way, recently I've been working on profiling our code so performance is on the top of my mind. I ran the profiler against this PR and noticed a dip in performance in one of the functions. Do you want to hop on a call sometime to explore a few ways we can refactor xyz function? Really curious to hear what you think and after thinking about this for a while I have an idea or 2."