I don't see why I would dream up awesome motivations where the real ones are actually rather mediocre, if not even pathetic. I kinda prefer having eyes in the head, a working brain etc.
why do people have the need to be coddled. If someone says it sucks and tells you why, its better than saying they love it and are lying about. Stop being so sensitive, and embrace any feedback.
No, I won't. I was just going off on twitter ranting about the quantifiable suck of VOIP client interfaces (proof: http://www.voipsupply.com/blog/free-sip-softphone-roundup) They all suck and the people building that should be aware.
Not only is there nothing wrong with demanding more from our fellow software builders, we should demand more. That's how we make progress.
The point is that if your contribution ends at "this sucks," then you're not helping anyone out.
What I took from this is to either provide helpful, constructive criticism, or be quiet and let the people actually doing something instead of complaining on Twitter do it.
The reason people don't give much constructive criticism any more is, in my opinion, largely down to a set of pervasive, poisonous attitudes which affect the tech industry:
1: 'Ship early, ship often' is better than 'take your time and get it right'.
People need to release what they've got because GASP, somebody else might get there first! People falsely believe that the market decides based on speed to delivery, rather than overall quality. Investors might, but customers do not. There are a lot of sucky projects out there, regardless of the specific reasons WHY they suck. People don't have the time or inclination to actually provide useful criticisms, but they do feel the need to voice their disdain.
2: Everyone's a rock-star.
If everyone's a rock-star, nobody's a rock-star. The blogosphere is full of high profile developers and tech evangelists telling everyone how great we all are and how those stuffy 'management' types don't know what they're talking about. The developer is the guru, the shaman, the expert. Well, that's just wishful thinking. If you think you're a genius, you're probably not a genius. You don't have the credentials, the experience or expertise to effectively critique somebody else's project, so you dismiss it as 'it sucks' because you don't know how to articulate the issues you have with it.
3: Everyone's opinion is valid.
This is basically a reiteration of point 2, but I think this is an issue with Western civilisation as a whole. The ease with which people can now publicise their opinions means that people WILL publicise their opinions. There is too much noise, because people think that their opinions are valid and useful. Hell, I'm doing it right now!
I think I generally agree with this (though I do it myself more than I'd like). I think the sentiment of just declaring something (or, more often, someone) 'sucks' is a bit immature, and it's almost always unconstructive. I was listening to the Kalzumeus podcast the other day, and they were talking about this very thing on the last show they did. I can't remember what they called it, but it was something like 'Be curious' instead of 'be critical'. He had an acronym, but it didn't stick with me. Anyway, the long and short of it was, instead of saying something like "this is just a pile of ass", ask the question of why it might be the way it is - there are probably good reasons.
Actually, the Kalzumeus podcast is a good example. I don't especially like it that much (sorry guys, if you're reading), but as I sat in my car listening to it I tried to think it through constructively, rather than just declaring it sucky. I tried to answer questions like: 1) why don't I like it? (the smug attitude of 'gosh-aren't-we-just-coining-it-in-contractors', the ohmygodyes exclamations about everything, the poor sound quality) and, 2) could I do it better myself? (definitely not) and, 3) if it really is that bad, why am I still listening to it (and, of course, that's when I realized it's not actually that bad).
OK, some stuff genuinely is poor quality, and some people are fools, but maybe rather than berate them we would find it more constructive to ask the question "why has nobody else done better?", or "why didn't they spend extra time polishing it?", or "why is this guy in this position and not somebody else?". There are probably good answers to those questions. This is also moving in to 'constructive criticism' territory, which is actually good.
BTW, I'm not saying coddle me (or anybody else). Be honest, be brutally honest, but be constructive. Before getting all arsey and just slinging insults at someone or something, ask the question Why...?
6 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 24.4 ms ] threadNot only is there nothing wrong with demanding more from our fellow software builders, we should demand more. That's how we make progress.
What I took from this is to either provide helpful, constructive criticism, or be quiet and let the people actually doing something instead of complaining on Twitter do it.
1: 'Ship early, ship often' is better than 'take your time and get it right'.
People need to release what they've got because GASP, somebody else might get there first! People falsely believe that the market decides based on speed to delivery, rather than overall quality. Investors might, but customers do not. There are a lot of sucky projects out there, regardless of the specific reasons WHY they suck. People don't have the time or inclination to actually provide useful criticisms, but they do feel the need to voice their disdain.
2: Everyone's a rock-star.
If everyone's a rock-star, nobody's a rock-star. The blogosphere is full of high profile developers and tech evangelists telling everyone how great we all are and how those stuffy 'management' types don't know what they're talking about. The developer is the guru, the shaman, the expert. Well, that's just wishful thinking. If you think you're a genius, you're probably not a genius. You don't have the credentials, the experience or expertise to effectively critique somebody else's project, so you dismiss it as 'it sucks' because you don't know how to articulate the issues you have with it.
3: Everyone's opinion is valid.
This is basically a reiteration of point 2, but I think this is an issue with Western civilisation as a whole. The ease with which people can now publicise their opinions means that people WILL publicise their opinions. There is too much noise, because people think that their opinions are valid and useful. Hell, I'm doing it right now!
Actually, the Kalzumeus podcast is a good example. I don't especially like it that much (sorry guys, if you're reading), but as I sat in my car listening to it I tried to think it through constructively, rather than just declaring it sucky. I tried to answer questions like: 1) why don't I like it? (the smug attitude of 'gosh-aren't-we-just-coining-it-in-contractors', the ohmygodyes exclamations about everything, the poor sound quality) and, 2) could I do it better myself? (definitely not) and, 3) if it really is that bad, why am I still listening to it (and, of course, that's when I realized it's not actually that bad).
OK, some stuff genuinely is poor quality, and some people are fools, but maybe rather than berate them we would find it more constructive to ask the question "why has nobody else done better?", or "why didn't they spend extra time polishing it?", or "why is this guy in this position and not somebody else?". There are probably good answers to those questions. This is also moving in to 'constructive criticism' territory, which is actually good.
BTW, I'm not saying coddle me (or anybody else). Be honest, be brutally honest, but be constructive. Before getting all arsey and just slinging insults at someone or something, ask the question Why...?