Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Joel Spolsky: Lunch

joelonsoftware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 210 posts

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#181

Post by mkramlich »

Eagleman99 wrote: post #176

I've often felt ostracized at my employer just for not following the rite/folklore of lunch together. Joel has a conflict of interest. As owner of course he stands to benefit if his employees went for lunch together, because inevitably they'd be talking about work, maybe even solving work-related problems in the process. While lunch is a great occasion for socializing - it'd be best to be up to the individual on how…

You nailed it. I think Joel as a business owner likes to have all his staff eat lunch together, because it helps "build team" and lets him evaluate all of them further in an alternate setting. It's beneficial for him. But it's not necessarily the best thing for each individual employee.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#182

Post by reso »

spolsky wrote: post #161

To those who thought that team lunch is "mandatory," you misread the article. It's not mandatory. You can go out instead. You can go to the gym instead. You can hide in your office and "free your mind" instead. You can bring your friends or family to our lunch. You can go out instead. You can take a picnic. You can come in after lunch and work late instead of working early. I don't even think there's social pressure…

I feel like those of us blessed to work in very positive environments forget that many people do not, and when those people hear that "the team always eats together" immediately assume it is a management enforced policy, and not a spontaneous event.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#183

Post by alxv »

hammock wrote: post #55
edw519 wrote: post #18

I have always hated this and probably always will. I have rarely eaten lunch with my work mates. Just a few reasons why: 1. I don't want to talk about work at lunch. 2. I want to get out of the office and get some fresh air. 3. I often want to get away from the very people that Joel suggests spending time with on my break. 4. I'm a "food outlier". I hate pizza, deli, and fast food. I won't eat it away from work. Why…

I'm incredibly surprised at how anti-social most of the comments are here. Then again, I just watched the Tina Fey interview at Google, and realizing that maybe I ought not to be surprised. I had this mental image of Google as being a hip, cool, social company to work for but the audience seemed so contrary to this, and even Eric Schmidt would go on and on about how "literal" Googlers take everything, how stereotypic…

Even Eric Schmidt would go on and on about how "literal" Googlers take everything, how stereotypically engineer-minded they are, basically implying they were incapable of being creative or having vision or social skills.

Do you realize the hypocrisy of what you are saying? You criticizes that taking things literally is bad by taking Schmidt's comments literally.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#184

Post by yason »

While some people certainly enjoy it, this kind of culture might be horrible for others.

I would detest it; I like to choose who I spend my spare time with, and for lunch that's often alone. Sometimes I go and have lunch with someone I consider a friend. Being just the two of us at least opens the window for good discussions.

Nothing against coworkers, really.

But it's hard to comfortably talk about anything else than work or perhaps some impersonal superficialities with people who aren't your friends in the deepest sense of the word. And I certainly do mind talking about work or impersonal superficialities when I'm supposed to have a nice time off to enjoy some food. It takes a special group where all members can talk openly about themselves without boring or irritating others; not going to happen at work.

One knows a friend when one sees one, and they're rare to come by. So the situation where most of your coworkers would also happen to be your friends is nearly impossible unless you only have one or two coworkers. I have one friend at work, another who's a very good acquaintance, but often I just hook up with some other friend not from where I work.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#185

Post by daemin »

telemachos wrote: post #149
nadam wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am introverted an geek, but this: "I'd rather shoot myself than hear anything about their children." is borderline anti-social for my taste. Or maybe he just really don't like his coworkers for some reason.

Calling it 'borderline' is too polite. I couldn't decide if (1) he was deliberately overdoing it (revealing the satire?), (2) deeply hated children in general or (3) found his co-workers' children especially hateful or what. Actually the whole of (7) is way over the border of anti-social: If my work mates are talking about something other than work, I'm probably not interested. I'd rather chew razor blades than talk…

As a single male there's a limit to how much talk about a co-worker's children I can stand. If they have an interesting story to tell then that's fine, but if the parents start chatting about/comparing their children then it's time for me to go and do something else.

Right now I'm not a fan of children, this will probably change when I get my own (in many years), but until then I'd rather talk about something else.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#186

Post by zohebv »

spolsky wrote: post #161

To those who thought that team lunch is "mandatory," you misread the article. It's not mandatory. You can go out instead. You can go to the gym instead. You can hide in your office and "free your mind" instead. You can bring your friends or family to our lunch. You can go out instead. You can take a picnic. You can come in after lunch and work late instead of working early. I don't even think there's social pressure…

I am surprised the negative comments on HN. I worked at Microsoft, where one team followed your policy while another did not and lunch time was always better with the team that had your policy. I think you should really just ignore the comments on HN. Maybe they are missing some kind of context.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#187

Post by tjogin »

edw519 wrote: post #18

I have always hated this and probably always will. I have rarely eaten lunch with my work mates. Just a few reasons why: 1. I don't want to talk about work at lunch. 2. I want to get out of the office and get some fresh air. 3. I often want to get away from the very people that Joel suggests spending time with on my break. 4. I'm a "food outlier". I hate pizza, deli, and fast food. I won't eat it away from work. Why…

Sure, understood and agreed. I like to get away from work during lunch too.

But, for those rare times when I might eat at work, I like the idea of a few long tables, for the reasons Joel outlined. It might solve some awkward problems for some people, and I don't see the harm in it for the rest.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#188

Post by Legion »

Legion wrote: post #154
jacques_chester wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Each of his programmers gets an office to themselves. Introverts and extroverts are getting recharges under his arrangements.

Being along in an office to work is not a substitute for being along to relax and recharge. Working time is where I expend energy, not recharge it.

Why my iPad corrected "alone" to "along" twice, I'll never know.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#189

Post by [deleted] »

CodeMage wrote: post #90
edw519 wrote: post #18

I have always hated this and probably always will. I have rarely eaten lunch with my work mates. Just a few reasons why: 1. I don't want to talk about work at lunch. 2. I want to get out of the office and get some fresh air. 3. I often want to get away from the very people that Joel suggests spending time with on my break. 4. I'm a "food outlier". I hate pizza, deli, and fast food. I won't eat it away from work. Why…

10. "Enforced association" is phoney. I'd rather just make my own friends at work or out of work. So what if it appears to be a clique? All that means is that we are humans acting naturally. Couldn't have said it better myself. I've always detested these "team-building" initiatives that intrude into my own private social life. To every company that tells its employees that "we're all a big family": I have my own fami…

[deleted]

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#190

Post by kitsune_ »

InfinityX0 wrote: post #28
edw519 wrote: post #18

I have always hated this and probably always will. I have rarely eaten lunch with my work mates. Just a few reasons why: 1. I don't want to talk about work at lunch. 2. I want to get out of the office and get some fresh air. 3. I often want to get away from the very people that Joel suggests spending time with on my break. 4. I'm a "food outlier". I hate pizza, deli, and fast food. I won't eat it away from work. Why…

Synopsis: You hate your job, not your lunch. Quit your job and get a job that you love, and you'll inevitably end up loving the lunch you currently hate.

First of all, I do not have to LOVE my job. As everything in this world, most things have good and bad sides. Surprise!

Applying the concept of love to something as mundane as a job is ridiculous. Just a couple of generations ago, a job was a job was a job? Why, because a job meant survival. You either work your ass off, or you and your family starve. Did all these people love the hard labor, getting up at 4am to tend to a withering field? These generations were much more fatalistic about life and accepted bad things as an inevitable part of life.

Of course, nowadays, the idea that someone tolerates something stressful or taxing is seen as ludicrous.

Post reply on HN