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

Stop trying to engineer your way out of listening to people

ashley.rolfmore.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 305 posts

Re: Stop trying to engineer your way out of listening to people

#271

Post by Throaway8675456 »

donatj wrote: post #127

I tend to be very exacting in my word choice. If I used a specific word, I meant it. Many people I find speak in what I would describe as tone poems. They circle around an idea using whatever word is within reach, and expect you to understand the meaning based on shared connotations. These people are tiring to interpret. When I write something, each and every word was chosen specifically and with intention. The numbe…

English is a stress-based language. Literally every word in English has multiple meanings along mutule axes. Stop being willfully obtuse.

Re: Stop trying to engineer your way out of listening to people

#272

Post by balamatom »

welldoneator wrote: post #142
balamatom wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You can’t hand wave away the work of interpreting (aka listening) to someone. And yet, that's what their manager did. Not only that, they precluded interpretation for the other people, by running the documentation through the language mixer. And half the commenters are blaming GP for making the effort to do the right thing. "Power", "authority", literally refers to the ability to hand-wave interpretative labor uncon…

To be clear, I was primarily responding to their notion of perceiving other people as imprecise rather than anything their manager did.

To be clear, you say?

Anyway, nice job holding someone accountable for perceiving!

Re: Stop trying to engineer your way out of listening to people

#273

Post by balamatom »

yyy3 wrote: post #175
mjburgess wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On your last sentence: The very first sentences should clear warnings not to modify the document, and read it entirely. That the contents of the document are short ( And if that still doesnt work, arrange a 15min meeting with relevant stakeholders and go through the document quickly before releasing it. It is my view that we have always been an oral species, and the great tyranny of the written words always a great b…

>Writing has always been a great burden. It should not be elevated to, nor equivocated with, some great utility or intellectual practice. That was for an era where sound was harder to record and transmit than words; and where meetings required moving around the world. Okay Socrates[1]. Obviously writing has not been a "great burden" because it's 5000 years later and we're still all doing it. It hasn't been enough of…

Thank you.

Re: Stop trying to engineer your way out of listening to people

#274

Post by balamatom »

busyant wrote: post #258
balamatom wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let us know how that goes, telling someone who is defending themself from you how they should "Be More Vulnerable!"

it's my son. he's young, bright, but puts up defenses to protect his perceived vulnerabilities. I try to explain to him that exposing your vulnerabilities humanizes you... at least it does to the type of people I admire. but sometimes being 19 is difficult in that way.

It's hard. Just a thought - maybe he will open up more if he feels more safe.

Re: Stop trying to engineer your way out of listening to people

#275

Post by [deleted] »

gbjw wrote: post #237
Isamu wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have found that people who speak indirectly don’t agree that they are indirect, have no idea why you think they are not direct. It’s so ingrained it can’t be seen. I have extreme examples from friends, where somehow they “hear” the opposite of what I say because they are always looking for the indirect meaning, not what you are saying. Fun example from a friend: his family were extremely direct but his girlfriend’s…

> Fun example from a friend: his family were extremely direct but his girlfriend’s family was very indirect. As a young naive guy he was having dinner with his girlfriend’s family and her father asked: “is there any salt” and my friend looked up at the glass salt shaker and said “yes” and continued with his meal. Are we supposed to side with your friend here? The fact that he couldn't infer that the father might want…

[deleted]

Re: Stop trying to engineer your way out of listening to people

#276

Post by godelski »

watwut wrote: post #238
godelski wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's poor management to interpose oneself between employees. I didn't interpret mjburgess as defending the manager or even condoning the action. In fact, I read their comments as recognizing that action as a failure. The difference is that mj was trying to give advice to donatj, and donatj can't control what their manager does. So the advice is crafted such that it gives actionable suggestions to donatj. Yet, that…

> So the things to do are either fix the problem or figure out how to work with the broken thing. So, I will say that if you did not seen or read a text in question, there is no way for you to accurately diagnose issues with the text and give out advice on how to make it better. Such advice from someone who simply assumes the way the text was wrong based on some manager rewriting it with ai is less then useless. It i…

  > It is, frankly, ridiculous to think one can give meaningful advice about text you have never seen. And then double down in comments.
I'm not the manager, there's no doubling down.

As for answering the question, you're right and wrong. You're right that I don't have enough information to give specific and nuanced suggestions. Like you said, I didn't see the original doc nor the AI rewritten one. I only have OP's comment. But you're wrong because I do have enough information to write the advice that I did. The advice is still broad because that's all that I can give with the information I have, but that doesn't mean it is useless.

You accuse me of not reading, but I'd encourage you to read my comment again. I explicitly stated that I am not advocating for what the manager did. I explicitly stated that I think it was wrong to do. But we're trying to solve problems, right? I took OP's comment as a legitimate request for help. Maybe they were just complaining and wanted someone to validate them. But hey, they posted in public and so are going to get a wide range of interpretations. That can be helpful, but may not be what was intended.

So either we try to respond to each other in good faith, acting as if everyone here is not acting maliciously, and trying to do their best, or we fight. I'm sorry, but that's what the situation is. If you just want to poke problems with things, then you're not helping. There are issues and limitations, and you're more than welcome to point them out but don't treat the setting like we're enemies. We're not. If you can't figure out how to critique while being collaborative then you aren't going to work well with others. And who knows how effective what I've said is. All I have to respond is your one comment that feels out of place to me. IDK if it's an off day for you, you didn't read right, I wrote wrong, or one of a million other things. But I'm trying to work with others (including you), are you trying to work with us?

Re: Stop trying to engineer your way out of listening to people

#277

Post by Isamu »

gbjw wrote: post #237
Isamu wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have found that people who speak indirectly don’t agree that they are indirect, have no idea why you think they are not direct. It’s so ingrained it can’t be seen. I have extreme examples from friends, where somehow they “hear” the opposite of what I say because they are always looking for the indirect meaning, not what you are saying. Fun example from a friend: his family were extremely direct but his girlfriend’s…

> Fun example from a friend: his family were extremely direct but his girlfriend’s family was very indirect. As a young naive guy he was having dinner with his girlfriend’s family and her father asked: “is there any salt” and my friend looked up at the glass salt shaker and said “yes” and continued with his meal. Are we supposed to side with your friend here? The fact that he couldn't infer that the father might want…

Yeah it’s just meant to be funny, in a haha-been-there kind of way. It’s an example of Asperger’s -like thinking, overly literal. My friend was embarrassed in front of his gf, and he learned what indirect speaking was.

Indirect speakers don’t know they are speaking indirectly. They get upset with literal people, because “how could you not know what I mean? You must be a jerk!”

Re: Stop trying to engineer your way out of listening to people

#278

Post by MSKJ »

donatj wrote: post #127

I tend to be very exacting in my word choice. If I used a specific word, I meant it. Many people I find speak in what I would describe as tone poems. They circle around an idea using whatever word is within reach, and expect you to understand the meaning based on shared connotations. These people are tiring to interpret. When I write something, each and every word was chosen specifically and with intention. The numbe…

Precise writing is good, simple writing is better. Writing is a tool of communication, it is also an art. Art can be open to interpretation, documentation should not be open to interpretation. As a tool writing can be boring and repetitive to reduce alternate interpretations, this may result in being less precise with words and reinforcing a concept with simpler repetitive sentences

Re: Stop trying to engineer your way out of listening to people

#279

Post by crispyambulance »

hellohello2 wrote: post #222
crispyambulance wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The documentation was complete, correct, and relatively terse. Less than a page. No, that's YOUR IMPRESSION of your own writing. There are many reasons why others might not find what you wrote sufficient to understand it. You boss ran it through AI for a reason and that reason was most likely because it the document was not understandable or perhaps confusing. Did the document have usage examples? Did it explain co…

How can you be so critical of a stranger's work given that you haven't even seen it? "that reason was most likely because" -> Bear in mind you do not actually know the given situation.

None of us knows the exact situation but the fact that the person said his documentation was "complete, correct, and relatively terse" is a red-flag. It seems to me like smug over-confidence.

If the document really was so clear and error-free, then why would the boss try to "fix it"?

Re: Stop trying to engineer your way out of listening to people

#280

Post by crispyambulance »

basilikum wrote: post #245
crispyambulance wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The documentation was complete, correct, and relatively terse. Less than a page. No, that's YOUR IMPRESSION of your own writing. There are many reasons why others might not find what you wrote sufficient to understand it. You boss ran it through AI for a reason and that reason was most likely because it the document was not understandable or perhaps confusing. Did the document have usage examples? Did it explain co…

You are making a bunch of claims about a situation you know nothing about.

The OP just told us all what it was about. You don't know any more or less than I do.

I simply am skeptical of their smug take on it.

Post reply on HN