|
Marc Clifton wrote: Rarely do people actually want to hear the truth.
This triggered a long-lost memory. Something I hadn't thought of in decades.
Lets just say that a conversation was ended with me asking, "if you don't to hear the answer, why do you even ask the question?" I must've won, 'cuz I clearly remember there was no follow-up.
Have I mentioned I'm not married?
|
|
|
|
|
Having been downsized because I was honest about management and they didn't want to hear it(they asked). I find myself now being more careful in my wording. I have the is it worth my job conversation with myself quite often. Don't get me wrong here. I like my job alot. But I won't ever again be in the position of having to look for work just because some manager got her/his panties/underwear in a knot because they couldn't hand some well worded but honest feedback.
I am at a point in my life where I know it won't matter tomorrow and won't make a difference in the short or long run. So keeping my mouth shut is the best for me. I look out for #1.
That being said. I think most people say they would rather have honesty. But also most people don't like honesty when it is said to them. And if you word it in a way that isn't honest they will think you are talking about someone else. Most people are not introspective enough to see themselves for who they truly are. I think programmers for the most part are not these people.
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
|
|
|
|
|
rnbergren wrote: I am at a point in my life where I know it won't matter tomorrow and won't make a difference in the short or long run. So keeping my mouth shut is the best for me. I look out for #1.
This is the sad truth... no matter how good our intentions are at the start, we get knocked back so often, that we are forced to resorting into being selfish.
I guess as much as we might want an ideal world, we have to accept human nature, and just ride the train until it's out turn to get off.
|
|
|
|
|
I used to have great people skills but since getting older I find it harder to put up with peoples BS and so I've become somewhat of a recluse.
|
|
|
|
|
relatable content
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Frequently, "nice" doesn't work and you need to shock the listener (boss) into realizing that what he believes to be true is not.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, and I hate being put in the position, but so often I'm left with the choice if letting them entertain something that will fail (and I'll inevitably be held responsible for anyway) or hoping that if I tell them the truth, they'll listen so we can actually make the project work. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Someone (close) once said (screamed): "Why must you always be so logical!!".
The alternative had no appeal.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
I'm the first person to argue that logic is overrated, but the more I deal with the frustration that is other people the more I wish it wasn't.
Logic doesn't persuade most people most of the time. I've found if you want to persuade someone of something the most expedient and indeed effective way to do so is to attach some sort of reward to the belief, like membership in a social group (people want to belong - what this means in real world terms is there is strength in numbers), or financial reward "i pay you to agree with me"), or otherwise, getting them what they want. Another thing that can work is emotional appeal.
Logic is good for - if you're good at this sort of thing - verifying *one's own* beliefs against our ego, that constructs them most often in defense of our id. So we have to check them to make sure they're sound because for most people most of the time - we don't arrive at our beliefs empirically, even if we think we do. We can check our beliefs with logic though. The bottom line is logic helps oneself but rarely helps other people.
In the 19th century John Stuart Mill wrote as much in "The Oppression of Women" - in so many words.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Logic tells me to consult a map first if one plans to head out and don't know how to get where one plans to go.
Most seem to disagree with me on that point.
What sort of "reward" do you suggest in this case?
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
getting where you want to go is its own reward.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
It isn't the destination it is the journey.
HAHAHAHAHA
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
|
|
|
|
|
Not much help if you're already on the road, in the wrong direction.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have an 88 Oldsmobile. I replaced the cassette player with a CD player.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
One of the fundamental requirements for human communication to succeed is the ability to express yourself in a way that your audience will understand. Many programmers revel in their technical expertise and the fact that their typical audience doesn't understand them. The pathetic truth is, their ego-stroking from this view is utterly worthless. If you can't or are unwilling to communicate with others about what you are doing for them, and make the effort to do so in a manner that is understandable, then it doesn't matter how clever your code is, you are a failure as a programmer, and should exit the field.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: Especially where it concerns matters of what is possible, and what isn't, and what will work, and what won't the question comes down to "Do you want honest, or nice?" The rest is just in how you deliver it.
When you really analyse this, it makes no sense. Politeness doesn't mean you have to lie, same with tact or kindness. In almost all circumstances (in Western culture, that is), there is no reason to be both honest and kind/polite/tactful.
The idea that politeness inherently means that you have to lie / be dishonest is where you're going wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeroen_R wrote: Politeness doesn't mean you have to lie, same with tact or kindness.
Next time your wife asks you, "Does my butt look big in this dress?", you'll probably need to lie to be polite.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
nope. There are two possibilities
1. her butt doesn't look big in this dress => don't have to lie.
2. Her butt does look big in this dress => you can say that the dress doesn't really do her figure justice. Which is kind, polite and, important for this discussion, not a lie.
(Also, I've been informed by my children that big butts are now fashionable, so the example is kinda moot  )
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't say anything about politeness.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
More people in the software industry should know about the concept of psychological safety ("honesty first, but also as much niceness as possible" is the immediately relevant part). I highly recommend Amy Edmondson's book: The Fearless Organization[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I tried using tact once, and was told nicely to f*ck off.
My boss once told me I should try to be nicer. I told him if he wanted someone to be nice, he should have hired a politician instead of a programmer.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Honesty, truth, and the ability to say that I am wrong, and you are right. Especially with product support and product QA. Programmers seldom care, they always know the are right. But as a programmer if you listen carefully you can sometimes concede that they may be right. A slippery slope.
Gifford T Nicholson
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: Many developers would place a premium on honesty.
So do I. Never been paid for "tact". I offer truth, even if it is ugly.
honey the codewitch wrote: Many folks with "soft skills" would place a premium on nice.
Reality isn't nice. You paying extra for someone to be a suckup.
honey the codewitch wrote: The only way out of this double-bind is diplomacy - the art of telling someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip. This is not easy. Sometimes it's not even possible - like - "your {family member} died" and developers often don't have the social skillset to do that consistently.
Never learned that. I give facts, not comfort. I'm paid for the first, not the second.
honey the codewitch wrote: So I guess we can come off as a bit salty. But you know what? You're going to get the truth.
I think we can all benefit in general from remembering not to take things personally.
Be blunt, honest, we have to live in a reality.
honey the codewitch wrote: And some of us can benefit from practicing a little tact.
#define "little".
We say what is, my task to say so, my bosses task to work with that. Never been personal, never intended to insult. Just bluntly what is, and maybe some options. Always the truth.
If I was tactfull, I'd be doing marketing, or sales. I do software, it is 0 or 1, not "2" just because you like that idea.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent article! Agree 100%.
One addition: it's not a shame to be inexperienced/unprofessional in your "IT area". But it IS big shame to be insolent in your "wrong way", when people point you at your mistakes! 
Primary task of youngsties not to write a lot of dumb code, but to STUDY from your professional colleagues! And if they say "man, seems your program is total cr@p", it's not about you, but about your primitive level (which of course will improve!). Take it, ask why and STUDY AGAIN. Your "university" is not finished with diploma - journey just begins! Sit and discuss all you do, why it's wrong and WRITE it. Years later you'll laugh how stupid you was and how "unacceptable" was your programs.
Just 0 and 1, nothing personal. 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
