Board 8 > Moving to San Francisco

(+) Yeah! (+)

This is the worst topic
---

Update: My PC became deceased so I had to dump more money into getting a new one!

Living that air mattress life for a while longer!
---

I avoided looking at this topic for an entire day because the thought of it made me feel super cringey and that is how I know I've extended too far once again.

I hope you're enjoying San Francisco. :)

To me the topic was never about whether working remote was good or bad or whether face to face was necessary. It was just about foolmo coming across as a condescending douchenozzle. I'm sure it's not 100% intentional and part of it just escalates with me because his particular flavor of condescension hits close to home and it's related to things I often think about IRL but rarely have the chance to discuss, so when I'm already here blowing off steam in the first place and such a subject comes up I get entangled easily.

Anyway our work experiences are pretty different, it seems, and I agree with basically everything Lopen said.

Nelson_Mandela posted...

This is the worst topic

Did you read all of them? ;)

turbopuns3 posted...

foolm0r0n posted...

They can learn to program as well as you, but you (clearly) won't learn to communicate like them. That's why I say they are more effective.

I used to have a job that was live chat (instant messaging) techincal support and my pay rate was determined by customer satisfaction surveys, in which I was consistently in the highest tier (>95% satisfaction)

My job prior to being a developer was also a technical job where I had to communicate countless times per day with external customers - half techincal, half non-technical - via email only, for 2.5 years. (When it was particularly involved they would call me on the phone-- because it's more effective when you have a lot to discuss)

Prior to that I had a job where all I did all day was call people on the phone and support technical issues remotely.

Now that I'm a dev my team rates me as the best communicator.

When I was younger I was the lead in a few different plays and have been in musicals, public speaking roles, etc. basically since I was 15.

For goodness sake, stop talking to me like I'm some ass-backward stubborn nincompoop who just doesn't have a clue.

Please, if you're going to keep on about it, share with us these almighty _sources_ you have. Show me the science that's going to prove to me once and for all that I should never look my coworkers in the eye again. I really can't wait to see it.

Ok so you don't inevitably swivel your chair when solving a hard problem. Just making sure you are changing that statement. Ignore anything I said based off that.

As for the sources, you've at least heard of flow right?
---

Lopen posted...

I have observed failures, and you dismiss them

I have solutions to them. That's not dismissing. Unless I missed something?

Lopen posted...

If you just misunderstand where their issue is, you'll never be able to figure out what they don't get, and thus you won't be able to clarify anything.

I understand them, and they understand me. I just don't need to fellate them in an attempt to trick them into thinking I'm their friend and so we can end up at some lame compromising non-conclusion where we both happily go on thinking we won.

This convo provided me some good insight into some typical and also extreme viewpoints so I'm fine with stopping. But I'm not gonna admit anything that's false just to appease anyone.
---

red sox 777 posted...

Foolmo, has it occurred to you that people might feel a 4 hour commute is worth it to be around people they like?

Duh? I know people have a giant toolbox for excusing problems with their work situation. And many of those are broadly harmful in a lot of ways people don't even think about. That's the whole point.

A lot of this argument could be applied to the concept of a work wife too, for example. Or any other sexual harassment based work "preference" (see: sephg's posts). Not just because marginalized people benefit the most from remote work options, but also because I do think the issue is THAT serious, and will be hard to ignore very soon.
---

Then why does any chat conversation that escalates in complexity invariably result in one of us walking over to the other person's computer?

What I'm saying here is that if what you say is correct that chair swiveling is the most awful way to communicate and that the damage it has on my company is easy to demonstrate, the following scenario I'm about to describe would not exist. And yet it happens several times a day (not with just me specifically but across the whole department). We do not depend completely on face to face communication but it is far more practical in some contexts.

Here is an example scenario of what I'm describing:

I'm in the office, at my desk, working on a bug ticket. I'm looking through the relevant section of code and just getting a grasp of what it's trying to do. It's the first time I've seen this particular part of our code.

Eventually I pinpoint where things are going wrong, and I start trying to think of the best solution. A helpful thing to have would be full contextual knowledge of what the original developer was aiming for when they wrote the code - why do it this way and not that way, are there any pitfalls I should be aware of, any relevant business logic, do any of our other repos depend on this code, etc.

The original developer is sitting at their desk which is approximately 10 feet away. I look over and notice him sitting there with headphones on.

He seems to be focused, so I send him a message over our team chat as to not be intrusive (notifications are configurable, he can be bothered when he wants to be, etc. yay asynchronous communication)

After 5 or 10 minutes he responds something to the effect of "oh, hmmm that was a long time ago that I worked on that. I need a refresher to be able to give a good answer"

Now at this point, he has two options (well, three I guess):

-read over the bug ticket to get a gist of the issue, then change contexts of what he's working on, (opening up another instance of his IDE, browser, etc.), sift through the code long enough to jog his memory on everything, eventually type up some notes and/or response questions which may or may not ultimately be of any real relevance to my direct problem

or,

-he can stand up and take 5 steps over to my desk, where I'm sitting there with the exact spot in the code already open, and my mind is totally fresh on all the context of the bug and the existing code, so I can very quickly catch him up on the exact relevant parts, which things I've looked into already, what I've considered and not considered, etc. , and as he sort of stumbles around in his memory getting back to the point of the code path I'm working in, I can quickly steer him and keep him on track because I know exactly where I need him to be

(third option is he just doesn't help me but that's neither here nor there)

Now, that whole face to face interaction could take place over the team messaging system. But it would take way longer even if we said the exact same words back forth, because typing is slower than talking. But on top of that it's impossible that the exchange would not use more words over chat because I don't get to know what he's thinking until he fully completes and commits a message. I just see some moving ellipses for 30 seconds and then get a few lines that may not be remotely relevant. Whereas in spoken language I could cut him off right away if he's off base.

When given the option in this scenario, it's kind of silly to picture us sitting 10 feet part, chatting to each other about the problem, when we could just be talking and be way more effective. Everyone who chooses to work in the office would make the decision to stand up and walk over to the other person's desk, because it's just a thousand times more practical in that context.

So I just want to say that looking at computer screens hurts my eyes. I prefer reading things in hard copy for that reason. Also, having a lot of windows and tabs open causes me stress, whereas having a few piles of documents in hard copy sitting on my desk causes me far less stress. I assume foolmo will just say that I should learn to not be stressed by having lots of windows and tabs open.
---

I mean that is a legitimate struggle for you and I do feel bad for you, but I would definitely say you should get better at it since over 20 years ago we've decided that our entire economy will be run over computer screens. It's pretty irrelevant to the remote work issue but it's a good example of a skill that became increasingly necessary and hard to ignore over time.
---

turbopuns3 posted...

async communication stuff

Yeah that's exactly what I'm talking about. Not sure why you were arguing so much for the anti-remote side.

Also you know that screenshare programs exist so I don't know why you typed all that stuff about text vs voice. They have a ton of great features esp for pair programming that make them great even if you're standing next to the person, as I'm sure you know.

Just fix your (subconscious?) disrespect for your remote coworkers and you're good.
---

Now that I think about it, I think the reason foolmo thinks remote is superior to in person is the lack of strong rules and boundaries in most in-office places.

Remote basically guarantees you get flow time while most places aren't strict enough in person.

I think a theoretical high functioning highly organized in person workplace would overall be more effective than remote. One where you aren't allowed to interrupt someone except for emergencies or during very specific times of the day (last 2 hours usually since a lot of people usually work better in the morning). Besides that only async communication. It gives you best of both worlds, less random distractions but still the ability to get the benefits of in person communication.

Although clearly this ideal doesn't exist and will likely never exist, and I would say on average a remote work place would get you a good chunk more flow time than 95% of office environments.
---

foolm0r0n posted...

Not sure why you were arguing so much for the anti-remote side.

I've never been anti-remote and you know this by now I'm sure.

Anyone who argues that remote isn't better 100% of the time is THE ENEMY dude
---

Lopen posted...

Anyone who argues that remote isn't better 100% of the time is THE ENEMY dude

How ironic is it that foolmo is doing his best brick wall impression in this debate about effective communication.

If we had this argument in person it would've lasted an hour, two hours tops. Look at what happens when you have the conversation asynchronously! Days of bullshit. Score one for face to face imo, imo.

Here you go @PrivateBiscuit1

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/8-gamefaqs-contests/78182311

I think foolmo should pay for my new PC I had to buy for me letting him talk about his nonsense in my topic about my big life change he initially tried shitting on.

I'll even talk to him remotely if he does.
---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

I think foolmo should pay for my new PC I had to buy for me letting him talk about his nonsense in my topic about my big life change he initially tried shitting on.

Sure why not actually

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

I'll even talk to him remotely if he does.

nvm no deal

Or actually just pay for it with your new job. I don't get a San Fran salary lol.
---

turbopuns3 posted...

I've never been anti-remote and you know this by now I'm sure.

Like I said, maybe it's subconscious or subtle, but it's real. It's about about being part of the problem, or part of the solution. Async communication is the core issue though so you're mostly fine.

Colegreen_c12 posted...

I think a theoretical high functioning highly organized in person workplace would overall be more effective than remote

Like yeah, the benefits of async communication completely apply in person too. In fact, they apply even when you're a solo worker, for the sake of your future self. It's just like using version control for your code when solo. There is no gray area or pros/cons, it's unequivocally good.

But the real meat of the issue is when you get past the effectiveness of in-person vs remote work, assuming both are perfectly using async communication (and sync when minimally necessary). Then you get into the social aspects of the two systems. The effects there are so wide reaching and fundamental to our society it's kinda scary to think about. And I think that's where people generally get their kneejerk reactions to remote work (either negative or positive).
---

foolm0r0n posted...

Like I said, maybe it's subconscious or subtle, but it's real. It's about about being part of the problem, or part of the solution.

You're on a crusade and as a result you extract implications which don't exist just for the sake of having something to fight against, but alright.

It looks like you don't even disagree with any of my stances. Async communication still works if you're in the same room, spoken language has its place (even if remotely), and if the social dynamic is good on the team (which is possible, if uncommon) then there's no issue being in the same room.

turbopuns3 posted...

It looks like you don't even disagree with any of my stances

That is mostly correct, just your behavior. One is more important than the other.

turbopuns3 posted...

if the social dynamic is good on the team (which is possible, if uncommon) then there's no issue being in the same room

This I do disagree with, because once you get into defining what "good social dynamic" means, you'll see how toxic and exclusionary it is.
---

foolm0r0n posted...

exclusionary

People are allowed to work from home

\_()_/

If it was in the future at a point when the default was for everyone to work remote, would it be toxic and exclusionary for an employee with a large house to tell people they're welcome to come over and work at their house if they wanted?

No, but only if the right efforts were put in. But those efforts apply to remote work too, so if remote was the default, it's very likely the customs would transfer to the IRL
---