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

How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

charity.wtf

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 304 posts

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#81

Post by maroonblazer »

kapep wrote: post #78

"the story in my head" sounds really weird to me as a non-native speaker. Is that a common phrase? I guess "The story in my head is that you asked me to send that status email ..." means that this is what they remember. On the other hand "... the story in my head is that you think owning that number is part of my job, and now you’re upset with me, or you think I’m incompetent at my job" sounds like they mean "the sto…

Despite how careful someone may be when communicating, there's almost always room for different interpretations of what's been communicated. The "story in my head" is another way of saying: "There's a few different ways to interpret what you're saying, and here's the interpretation that I've settled on. Is that the one you intended?"

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#82

Post by toast0 »

kapep wrote: post #78

"the story in my head" sounds really weird to me as a non-native speaker. Is that a common phrase? I guess "The story in my head is that you asked me to send that status email ..." means that this is what they remember. On the other hand "... the story in my head is that you think owning that number is part of my job, and now you’re upset with me, or you think I’m incompetent at my job" sounds like they mean "the sto…

Yeah, that's what they mean. I don't think it's a common phrase, but it might be intentionally weird?

I might instead instead say 'So, what I'm hearing is you want me to send that email.' But that phrase is often used for passive aggression, so it shouldn't be used in a low trust situation.

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#83

Post by strken »

Dalewyn wrote: post #70
TylerE wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the occasional emoji is ok, especially in chat, but excess, especially multiples of the same emoji in a row are just childish.

Emojis and emoticons in any serious piece of communication are simply unprofessional and insincere. Do not use them, unless your intent is actually to piss your recipient off. Textbook example is the recent fiasco over at Linus Tech Tips, where they even used an emoji in an email to Billet Labs saying they "accidentally" auctioned off Billet's stuff. Anyone worth their paycheck doesn't use emojis in business communiq…

If your communication is straightforwardly positive you can use as many emoji as you want without much in the way of consequences. Sticking :tada: in a Slack announcement of good quarterly performance, or even an official blog post, is unlikely to upset anyone in the same way "You're fired! :fire:" would.

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#85

Post by makeitdouble »

generationP wrote: post #65

> Person B: “…. Hey, sorry to interrupt, but the story in my head is that you think owning that number is part of my job, and now you’re upset with me, or you think I’m incompetent at my job.” Do... people... talk like that?

Not in a casual conversation. But sadly yes, sometimes that's the kind of super crafted sentence you come up with because you're trying to land on very tensed subject from an angle that is somewhat neutral.

It's pretty complicated to start the subject from the other end, like "You seem to think I'm horrible at this job, but I quite disagree"

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#86

Post by fragmede »

HPsquared wrote: post #80
JohnFen wrote: post #30

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"

Absolutely. Using ChatGPT to professionalize "fuck you, pay my" has been great for not actually saying that to someone's face.

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#87

Post by maroonblazer »

ketzo wrote: post #32
JohnFen wrote: post #30

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's the easiest thing in the world to forget -- after all, you know how it's supposed to sound! How could they possibly misinterpret your very clear message? ;)

Exactly. It's analogous to the game where one person taps out the rhythm of a melody and the other person tries to guess which song it is. It seems so obvious to the person doing the tapping, because their head is loaded with all the other context of the song; namely, the harmony and melody. None of that context is available to the recipient.

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#88

Post by jtbayly »

gsuuon wrote: post #57
ketzo wrote: post #18

> 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…

I used to do this as well, maybe a bit _too_ much. After reading an article somewhere (I forget which) that had just an absolutely excessive amount of exclamations I've toned it back down a lot. But for the folks who don't ever use it -- try it out! It doesn't mean you're shouting, it maps to basically a slight increase in tone.

“try it out!” translates to an emphatic command, possibly shouted, to me.

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#89

Post by awb »

kapep wrote: post #78

"the story in my head" sounds really weird to me as a non-native speaker. Is that a common phrase? I guess "The story in my head is that you asked me to send that status email ..." means that this is what they remember. On the other hand "... the story in my head is that you think owning that number is part of my job, and now you’re upset with me, or you think I’m incompetent at my job" sounds like they mean "the sto…

It’s a philosophical construct acknowledging that the speaker’s reality might not match the listener’s. It stems from the idea that we all perceive the world differently and that there is no universal truth. It’s a longer form of “I think”, which takes ownership of your thoughts and doesn’t force the other person to conform to your reality.

It’s also an attempt to make an “unarguable” statement. You and I can debate forever if a chair is blue. But if I say “I think the chair looks blue”, it’s typically unreasonable for you to debate what thoughts are in my head.

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#90

Post by Cushman »

OJFord wrote: post #60
ketzo wrote: post #18

> 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…

> 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. I really hate to make such a clichéd and usually flawed argument, but can you imagine the reverse going down well? And if the male cohort (to continue this stereotype/generalisation/simplification) don't lik…

That’s a good perspective to bring!

One question, though: do you think it would make the rest of your comment materially worse communication if you added just one excessively positive but non-load-bearing sentence at the beginning? Maybe something like “That’s a good perspective to bring!”

Maybe that’s not the way you communicate most sincerely, the way it is for me and others. Maybe I sound insincere to you right now, in which case, please do say so!

But all else being equal, if you knew that that single change would make me and others materially more receptive to the rest of your comment, would you consider just… doing it anyways, out of pure self-interest?

Just food for thought :)

Post reply on HN