81–90 of 284 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These are probably the same people who care if I leave the office on time instead of staying late every night. I don't care to please these people.
It's not. Why do you have to assign other bad qualities to people you disagree with? Just to make it easier on yourself to disagree?
We are pretty small and have a 'camera on' policy for our one one hour meeting on Friday every week, and if you don't want to have your camera on you are asked not to participate, and an eight hour interview day every Tuesday. The only exception is for observers present during the meeting (for instance: customer representatives that do not have anything to contribute but are just there to listen and make their own no…
I don't understand how this could possibly be justified. We used to have conference calls all the time, they did seem to work so we kept having them... it's just that everyone has cameras now.
I don't understand why some people feel the need to harass people to turn their cameras on. Is there some kind of business reason why the cameras need to be turned on? Or is it just preference?
> There is nothing more annoying than to have an in-person meeting from the past devolve into staring at a wall of stills or icons and then to figure out who says what and to keep a conversation going.
That's an interesting experience, I wonder why that's happening to your team. This does not match my experience with voice-only calls.
There are valid reasons to ask people to turn their cameras on, and there are reasonable policies for using cameras in meetings, but it doesn't seem to me that an "always use cameras" or "never use cameras" policy is going to work as well as a more flexible policy.
Even interviews--I've done interviews both over voice and with a camera, and I've never felt like the camera gave me some significant benefit... either as interviewer or candidate. There are definitely exceptions, like for people who are partially deaf, but in general it's better to be flexible. People have different preferences and the interaction tends to go more smoothly if you're not a stickler for keeping your camera one way or another.
We are pretty small and have a 'camera on' policy for our one one hour meeting on Friday every week, and if you don't want to have your camera on you are asked not to participate, and an eight hour interview day every Tuesday. The only exception is for observers present during the meeting (for instance: customer representatives that do not have anything to contribute but are just there to listen and make their own no…
> If you can't be bothered to have your camera on in meetings then you probably shouldn't be in that meeting in the first place. I don't understand how this could possibly be justified. We used to have conference calls all the time, they did seem to work so we kept having them... it's just that everyone has cameras now. I don't understand why some people feel the need to harass people to turn their cameras on. Is the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you can't be bothered to have your camera on in meetings then you probably shouldn't be in that meeting in the first place. I don't understand how this could possibly be justified. We used to have conference calls all the time, they did seem to work so we kept having them... it's just that everyone has cameras now. I don't understand why some people feel the need to harass people to turn their cameras on. Is the…
I think they are trying to say, if you want a conference call have a conference call. I think there is an argument to be made that virtual meetings are separate and not simply an enhancement of a conference call.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some context: I'm a lead engineer on a team with six products. I keep my camera off in meetings. I'm in far more meetings than I can possibly be productive in. I'm also usually not the active speaker in meetings. Why stare into a camera when what my yearly bonuses are calculated on is work/team output? I've found most meetings I get into are either: - Developers who can't figure something out from documentation and a…
> I'm in far more meetings than I can possibly be productive in. > I'm also responsible for delivering code and 50-75% of my day is meetings. There's an organisational issue here.
We are pretty small and have a 'camera on' policy for our one one hour meeting on Friday every week, and if you don't want to have your camera on you are asked not to participate, and an eight hour interview day every Tuesday. The only exception is for observers present during the meeting (for instance: customer representatives that do not have anything to contribute but are just there to listen and make their own no…
What do your team members say of your view to the idea?
Next time you are in a conversation about remote work, see if you notice this: the only people who speak up are the ones who say "I can't wait to go to the office". The rest smile and nod. And yet online polls show a very different picture.
To make a different point than all the camera naysayers so far: I I'd be WFH for two years during covid, and everyone had their cameras off, I'd go crazy. Not seeing a face for months, being stressed about the other party in a meeting not even paying attention, just speaking into a void etc.
It's extremely rude in my opinion when people simply don't turn their cameras on in virtual meetings. Unfortunately, no one at my workplace except me does.
Different people have different expectations and there are probably a lot of reasons for the wide variety.
However it kinda sounds like you have a different expectation than the team you work with. Would be mindful of taking the stance that ‘everyone else is wrong’
In my opinion more important than the cameras, we need to standardize some sort of 3d audio to distinguish 'spacially' between different speakers in meetings.
Also note that while audio is physically 3D, we are only good at distinguishing on a 2D plane. Basically, you easily get left/right, and you kinda get near/far, but you don't get up/down. Not unless you cock your head.
We are pretty small and have a 'camera on' policy for our one one hour meeting on Friday every week, and if you don't want to have your camera on you are asked not to participate, and an eight hour interview day every Tuesday. The only exception is for observers present during the meeting (for instance: customer representatives that do not have anything to contribute but are just there to listen and make their own no…
That's a very black and white view. We (also relatively small company) take a much more flexible route. Some meetings, use a camera, like when you're presenting something to a group it adds to the story to see facial expression etc. Lots of other meetings use voice only, similar to how you just call someone when you have a question. Adding video doesn't change the answer and puts restrictions on participants to sit still in front of a camera while voice only can be done with a headset walking around.