
What Social Skills I Learn From The HN Community - rick_2047
http://www.lifeasparesh.co.cc/2010/07/what-social-skills-i-learn-from-hn.html
======
arnorhs
HN's Karma score has partially helped me better understand myself in the
social context. With time I've learned to realize which types of
responses/opinions people generally prefer and how to word the same sentence
so that it relates to people up to a point.

I'm the nerdy type, with some social mis-alignments and I don't often realize
how I represent my opinions and it's hard to look at yourself from a 3rd
perspective.

So Karma has actually helped me understand my place better. I'm not a Karma
whore by any means but I really like paying attention to which responses work
well and I even try to apply the same approach in every day life.

Another thing that has also helped me: Twitter. I actually believe I write
better since I started using Twitter because I'm more used to cramming more
information to a smaller amount of words.

At least, that's how I see it.

~~~
arnorhs
Ironically. That response got downvoted and I have no idea why.

~~~
scott_s
It's your community; if you feel a comment was unfairly down voted, up vote
it. I often make "correction" up votes.

~~~
cema
He referred to his own comment. He cannot upvote it.

Regarding down votes: some people click them because they disagree, some
because they think the post may be irrelevant. Sometimes it is not clear which
is the case.

~~~
scott_s
Ah, my mistake. I thought it was a different person.

------
wallflower
In my opinion, the best part of HN is that even when you are having a boring
day, you might learn something interesting of short or long-term value.

In my opinion, the second-best part is that if you are isolated IRL whether by
choice and/or circumstance (e.g. because you have too much work to do for a
client commitment that you don't go out with friends) - it makes you feel
connected/better when your comments impact or contribute to a discussion.

In brief, HN is an escape from routine that still is (even though it may be
classified as a routine, for many of us). Thanks, pg!

~~~
lotharbot
> _"you might learn something interesting of short or long-term value"_

This is a common attitude among HN readers: we want to learn things of value.
That's why we keep coming back here. This community makes a habit of saying
things of value, and of recognizing things of value and (through voting
algorithms) giving them a place of prominence.

------
Mz
_If you look at my submissions to HN you will notice that most of them are of
the Ask HN type. At first I did this because I had nothing to submit. My main
source of information still is HN._

I can identify with this general sentiment but I really suck at posting
questions. This was true long before I found HN and will likely remain mostly
true in spite of me actively working on this issue. So I think what a
particular individual learns will depend in part on where they are coming
from. I come from a non-coding background, I'm female and have spent lots of
time in female-majority environments. For me, one of the big obvious lessons
on HN is that men communicate and interact differently from women. In some
ways, I find myself more comfortable with that and in other ways less
comfortable.

~~~
jeromec
_For me, one of the big obvious lessons on HN is that men communicate and
interact differently from women._

Can you elaborate on this? I'd love to learn what you notice from your
perspective.

~~~
Mz
Probably the most obvious is that men are less touchy-feely. I find that in
female-majority environments, there is much more lie-to-your-face while
stabbing you in the back type behavior. I'm a real blunt individual, which
often goes over poorly with women (my dad and ex-husband are both career
military and my mom is foreign -- so, to be fair, lots of Americans find me
hard to take/hard to really understand, not just women). The flip side of that
is that people here seem to make less effort to understand my admittedly
"alien" perspective. It feels to me more like it is on me to work at
communicating effectively. I'm okay with that because I find that pat-you-on-
the-head and be nice to you stuff often doesn't really result in better
communication. Like a pain killer, it often just masks the fact there is a big
problem. Men seem to be better about bluntly letting you know it's an issue --
which can be very uncomfortable to face but, in the long run, is usually more
productive.

Of course, since I am female, I find that when I do the exact same thing a man
would do, it is often interpreted by other people as "overly aggressive". So
time will tell if I will be able to take the lessons learned here and put them
to constructive use in my life.

~~~
jeromec
_Probably the most obvious is that men are less touchy-feely._

Yes, I can believe that as being true. This may have little correlation, but I
distinctly remember a trip to a completely female run dental office. This was
for oral surgery, and I had every confidence in the doctor, but there were
times during the procedure (as my gums were being cut open) when I noticed her
being, how can I say, respectful or dainty, with my mouth, and I was thinking
to myself just get in there and do what you have to do! I'm pretty numb here!
lol (the work was top notch) but I guess it did make the overall experience a
bit nicer. :)

 _I find that in female-majority environments, there is much more lie-to-your-
face while stabbing you in the back type behavior._

Wow.

 _The flip side of that is that people here seem to make less effort to
understand my admittedly "alien" perspective._

Sadly, I think Americans can be guilty of this in general, often times,
including myself.

Thanks for sharing. :)

~~~
Mz
I read this some time ago and have been feeling vaguely like there was
probably a miscommunication somewhere. For sake of clarification, to me it
"goes without saying" (which is why I didn't say it) that people who are more
touchy-feely are also highly likely to be the type to lie (say nice things) to
your face while stabbing you in the back. Both things tend to be rooted in or
related to a dislike of confrontation. People who place an inordinately high
value on the (superficially) feel-good experience are, obviously (at least to
me), the same type that will make nice while doing you serious harm. Can't
have people (ie THEMSELVES) be uncomfortable while we burn them, now can we?

And if you got that the first time: nevermind. :)

~~~
jeromec
Hrm... I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying there is a correlation for
being touchy-feely with backstabbing? I thought you meant touchy-feely as a
definition for "a woman's touch" so to speak. In other words, being more
sensitive. For example, my mom is quite compassionate and empathetic, so she
would be more "touchy-feely" about some topics than I might be, but she is the
last person that would ever intentionally be a backstabber. I'm not sure if
this makes sense, and we may still have some miscommunication. I'm just trying
to get more insight into the female perspective, but I think you are saying
that often times females may be quicker to be deceitful when talking with one
another, whereas males will be blunt and upfront, even if it means offending
someone. Perhaps you are intending "touchy-feely" to mean non-genuine? That
may be our miscommunication.

~~~
Mz
I don't think it is accurate to say women (or anyone who is touchy-feely) are
more backstabbing. I do think it is accurate to say that touchy-feely types
are generally inclined to be less direct (what you characterized as
"deceitful") in the face of something socially unpleasant -- they seem to
expect others to read between the lines, infer and so on. When such subtleties
fail, they often don't deal well with the ugliness which ensues. Having
written my above paragraph, it occurred to me that although I am a conflict-
avoider and will go out of my way to avoid fighting with people, I seem more
comfortable with direct confrontation than most women and that is probably one
of the things that makes many people uncomfortable with me. People find me
"combative" although I really don't like to fight with people. But if there is
an issue, I generally prefer to be direct and prefer people being direct with
me -- assuming there is no malice on both sides. Where there is real malice,
best to know when to shut up.

FWIW: My experience has been that extremely suave, charming men are typically
also untrustworthy. They generally know how to manipulate people and usually
don't hesitate to do so. Of course, people who are both charming and have a
strong sense of integrity make wonderful company. But if I have to choose one
or the other, I prefer integrity to charm.

 _Perhaps you are intending "touchy-feely" to mean non-genuine?_

No, but I think there is some correlation between the two things. People who
want very much to make nice are inclined to tell "little white lies", which
puts one on a slippery slope. I wish my experiences indicated otherwise.

I hope that is clearer.

Thanks.

~~~
jeromec
Yes, that does seem clearer. Thanks for the clarification. LOL on the
"extremely suave, charming men" as it might describe one of my brothers. My
mom says he could "charm a nun out of some stuff" ;) And I do think he is a
bit manipulative (of my parents at least, he's the baby boy), but I do think
he tries to maintain some sense of integrity. Hopefully he notices how
straightforward I try to be, and that has some influence. I agree little white
lies can put anyone on a slippery slope. It's interesting to imagine those may
be more attributable to women than men, in general.

~~~
Mz
_It's interesting to imagine those may be more attributable to women than men,
in general._

I think there is some truth to that. I suspect that it's not "genetic" (or
whatever) so much as economic (for lack of a better word). But that's probably
a very long, controversial, off-topic discussion. :-D

------
pclark
Good rule if you want to be popular or socially successful: talk less.

the amount of times at parties, at networking events, whenever when I'll be
listening to someone and simply thinking "please stop talking now"

you could patch that rule with "listen more" == "talk less, listen more" eg:
ask questions.

a cardinal sin when networking is to dive into what you do and talk and talk
without bothering to ask the listener any questions.

i promise this will make you 10x more popular. and if you are talking, think
about how you can cut to the chase with fewer words.

~~~
rick_2047
It kinda already had made me very popular. My colleagues and friends now come
to more for advice more often and give more gravity to what I have to say,
because they know whatever I say would be well thought out and efficiently
said (more than anyone else they can turn to, anyway). Also they know I would
listen to there questions and try to improve (customise rather?) my advice to
their unique position.

~~~
drusenko
Quick tip: "I would listen to there questions" should be "I would listen to
their questions". Saw the mistake in your blog post several times and thought
I'd point it out as nobody has yet and it makes an otherwise good article
appear amateurish.

Mastering the difference between there/their/they're is a good skill to have
:)

------
joe_the_user
_Ask Obvious But Good Questions_

It actually irritates me that you can almost count on karma for saying
something like "prove it" to a post that may present fairly good evidence
already or that is clearly personal opinion not really subject to proof.

But I'm not wholly concerned with Karma. 6 points for something controversial
probably implies more impact than 20 point for something simplistic, since the
controversial point probably is going to generate a good deal of mod-downs
too.

~~~
jacquesm
I don't see why the questions should be obvious, there simply are no stupid
questions and if someone asks a question they deserve an answer, not an
automatic upmod.

Comments like 'citation needed', 'prove it' are fortunately rare enough on HN
that it's not a big problem.

~~~
robryan
I find many times I've asked questions related to an article that someone
involved closer in whatever the topic of the article is could answer I have
got up votes but less often answers. I guess it's a form of me to, others
interested in an answer to but have nothing to add will up vote.

------
timinman
I identify with the author. After getting comments down-voted for various
reasons, I've felt the need to better scrutinize my thoughts and to carefully
form my sentences when they have been worth submitting at all.

------
elbenshira
_Write In a Formal Style_

Formal style is boring. I think he meant _conversational style_. Write as if
you are having a nice, friendly conversation with your peers. This produces
persuasive writing.

------
andrewljohnson
This is a good way to approach classes you are involved in to, in high school,
college, or otherwise. Seek to learn, seek to teach.

~~~
sev
> Seek to teach

I often notice people getting offended if you try to teach them anything
directly though, in a social environment (even if you're known to be one to be
open to being taught)

~~~
wallflower
Consider why you are trying to teach. Is it to jockey for position/gain the
upper hand?

If you truly want to make a better impression, have people teach _you_. The
classic female 'Can you help me with my homework'. Really, no one likes a
know-it-all. And if you win an intellectual argument, are you really winning?
Show some interest in learning, genuine interest, from other people's
experiences or knowledge.

Teaching is one of the harder disciplines because it is not about the teacher
teaching but about the teacher learning how to teach from their students.

~~~
sev
Good points. I really like the analogy with the female common by-phrase you
brought up, which surprisingly I hadn't thought of. Of course, this helps you
in some ways, but still doesn't address how to teach properly when the
opportunity arises.

> And if you win an intellectual argument, are you really winning?

I've come to believe that unless you're in a debate team somewhere or are a
teacher/prof at a school, the answer to that question is almost always 'No'.

------
j_baker
Be careful with the last one. Overly formalized language is probably a lot
worse than underly formalized language.

~~~
rick_2047
That is why I had a strike through for formal in the last sentence. I realized
what I actually meant was an effective way. There is a difference between
effective and formal. Sometimes meaning is lost in too much of jargon and too
perfect a grammar.

------
tiffani
I've learned not to take things at face value and provide evidence (and demand
evidence) of why what's said makes sense, is credible, etc. People here are
always calling others out for what amounts to "anecdotal evidence" and I know
find myself doing that IRL much to the dismay of some people--coworkers, for
example--who like to put forth flimsy ideas and evidence of different things
as gospel. The average person doesn't ask questions (or just doesn't care as
much), but I've learned from being here not to be like that. I imagine it's
pissed some people off that I know, but it keeps misinformation down and thus,
everybody benefits.

------
steveklabnik
I've often thought that being involved in a variety of online communities over
the years has really increased my ability to think critically about a topic.
By now, I've seen and had so many arguments on such a wide range of topics
that I'm able to recognize similar patterns in new information that I come
across, and make better decisions because of it.

While debating certain things over and over does get old, at least you've
thought things through in a very thorough manner.

------
Alex3917
"Speak Only When You Have Something New To Add"

A better rule IMHO is "Don't talk unless you're selling something."

That is, don't talk unless you're trying to change someone.

