a tale of two widgets
Jan. 17th, 2019 01:29 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
queenluasay i'm in a team of engineers, and everyone else is discussing how to use Widget A to solve a problem.
but i think we should be using Widget B. so i say, "why don't we try using Widget B? i think it's better than Widget A for this."
a Super Senior Engineer could respond with a massive screed, with multiple bullet points, tearing down every aspect of Widget B, implying that it is Total Garbage.
i could then respond in one of two ways:
(1), the most likely, i'll stare at Super Senior Engineer, and i'll stare at all the dudes on his side, and think: fuck it, this isn't worth arguing about, let's just go with Widget A.
i haven't been convinced, and no knowledge was gained, but Super Senior Engineer sure got to feel superior.
(2), i'll buckle down: come up with a point-by-point rebuttal of all of Super Senior Engineer's points, and then Super Senior Engineer will get frustrated that i'm not "listening to him," and no matter who wins (probably not me!) we're both going to leave the encounter feeling unheard and frustrated.
alternatively, Super Senior Engineer could respond with a simple question: "hey, i've worked with Widget B in the past and it had some issues with cache coherency, but what's your experience with it?"
then that opens the door for me to answer: "well, i thought Widget B worked great for [x], but you're right that we did have to deal with cache coherency," and then we'll have a bit of a discussion of how i dealt with that, and maybe we'll still end up deciding that Widget A is best, but i've been heard and maybe Super Senior Engineer even learned a thing about Widget B he didn't know before. or, hell, maybe that even lets me say, "actually, they fixed the cache coherency problems in 2.0," and now maybe we can all agree that Widget B is better!
say Super Senior Engineer does the "massive screed" approach, though. then a colleague comes to him later and says: hey, did you consider maybe not doing a massive screed.
if Super Senior Engineer is being defensive, he could say:
* but i was right, it shouldn't matter how i say it (sure, but we're all squishy humans here so actually it does matter)
* but i care so much about getting this right and i don't want to feel like i can't speak up about engineering problems that are important to me (sure! but don't you want to speak up in an effectual way?)
* but when i argue that way with So-And-So, they argue right back, and we actually do discuss things and change each other's minds (okay, but maybe you and So-And-So know each other better, maybe you and So-And-So generally have an equal number of engineers on each other's sides, and so on... by default you should probably assume someone suggesting an alternative is being brave, and is a little nervous, perhaps)
* but that other engineer didn't even consider my point of view, they didn't even consider that they could be wrong or really consider Widget A (well, you didn't really give them a chance, after that opening salvo, right?)
* look, i'm a Super Senior Engineer, i have to deal with people questioning my decisions all the time, i'm fucking exhausted, i just had a kid, i'm too fucking tired to word things nicely for some punkass junior engineer. (yep! being senior sucks!!! sorry but that's just life. you're allowed to delegate, or just bow out of discussions until you're less tired, you know. but seriously, it sucks, sorry, part of the job.)
okay, i disguised this all as an engineering metaphor. and i think it applies in engineering situations. but really i was thinking of the average level of discourse i see in Certain Parts Of The Internet. replacing the relevant variables is an exercise left to the reader.
but i think we should be using Widget B. so i say, "why don't we try using Widget B? i think it's better than Widget A for this."
a Super Senior Engineer could respond with a massive screed, with multiple bullet points, tearing down every aspect of Widget B, implying that it is Total Garbage.
i could then respond in one of two ways:
(1), the most likely, i'll stare at Super Senior Engineer, and i'll stare at all the dudes on his side, and think: fuck it, this isn't worth arguing about, let's just go with Widget A.
i haven't been convinced, and no knowledge was gained, but Super Senior Engineer sure got to feel superior.
(2), i'll buckle down: come up with a point-by-point rebuttal of all of Super Senior Engineer's points, and then Super Senior Engineer will get frustrated that i'm not "listening to him," and no matter who wins (probably not me!) we're both going to leave the encounter feeling unheard and frustrated.
alternatively, Super Senior Engineer could respond with a simple question: "hey, i've worked with Widget B in the past and it had some issues with cache coherency, but what's your experience with it?"
then that opens the door for me to answer: "well, i thought Widget B worked great for [x], but you're right that we did have to deal with cache coherency," and then we'll have a bit of a discussion of how i dealt with that, and maybe we'll still end up deciding that Widget A is best, but i've been heard and maybe Super Senior Engineer even learned a thing about Widget B he didn't know before. or, hell, maybe that even lets me say, "actually, they fixed the cache coherency problems in 2.0," and now maybe we can all agree that Widget B is better!
say Super Senior Engineer does the "massive screed" approach, though. then a colleague comes to him later and says: hey, did you consider maybe not doing a massive screed.
if Super Senior Engineer is being defensive, he could say:
* but i was right, it shouldn't matter how i say it (sure, but we're all squishy humans here so actually it does matter)
* but i care so much about getting this right and i don't want to feel like i can't speak up about engineering problems that are important to me (sure! but don't you want to speak up in an effectual way?)
* but when i argue that way with So-And-So, they argue right back, and we actually do discuss things and change each other's minds (okay, but maybe you and So-And-So know each other better, maybe you and So-And-So generally have an equal number of engineers on each other's sides, and so on... by default you should probably assume someone suggesting an alternative is being brave, and is a little nervous, perhaps)
* but that other engineer didn't even consider my point of view, they didn't even consider that they could be wrong or really consider Widget A (well, you didn't really give them a chance, after that opening salvo, right?)
* look, i'm a Super Senior Engineer, i have to deal with people questioning my decisions all the time, i'm fucking exhausted, i just had a kid, i'm too fucking tired to word things nicely for some punkass junior engineer. (yep! being senior sucks!!! sorry but that's just life. you're allowed to delegate, or just bow out of discussions until you're less tired, you know. but seriously, it sucks, sorry, part of the job.)
okay, i disguised this all as an engineering metaphor. and i think it applies in engineering situations. but really i was thinking of the average level of discourse i see in Certain Parts Of The Internet. replacing the relevant variables is an exercise left to the reader.
