

I don't like you very much - DanielBMarkham
http://www.whattofix.com/blog/archives/2009/10/i-dont-like-you.php

======
gdp
Wow. I don't know if it's just a literary device being employed here, but this
article comes off as the work of somebody with a lack of empathy.

Through the description of the actions of each of the people with whom he
disagrees, I immediately found myself sympathising with the "other side". I
mean, there are the usual dailywtf-style "this guy is really dumb/awful to
work with/whatever" stories, and we all get a bit of a laugh out of them, but
this just comes across as a situation where the author is unable to grasp why
other people might behave towards him in these ways, or feel particular
feelings towards him.

> _I honestly don't know what interests me more, why Bob doesn't want to
> recommend me or why I thought Bob would recommend me when he won't. I think
> the second question has a lot more potential than the first!_

Sure, the second question is more interesting, but I don't think this article
goes any distance towards attempting to answer it.

People behave in particular ways for reasons that seem apparent to them. The
tone of this article annoys me because it appears to suggest that people who
behave according to motivations that are hidden from the author are somehow at
fault.

I just think this is symptomatic of so many of my experiences within the IT
industry - people always assume that their own motives are pure and good, and
that everyone else is acting dishonestly (to screw the client, or to avoid
doing work, or to advance their own career). I much prefer to assume that if I
don't understand somebody's motivations, the burden is on me to try to
understand, rather than just writing them off as bad/lazy/dishonest/whatever.

~~~
Tichy
Just curious, did you mirror this comment on whattofix, or is it some feature
of that blog to include HN comments?

~~~
gdp
I didn't do anything except post here, so I assume it's a feature of that
blog.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
I thought you had a great comment, so I manually entered it.

My article had a lot of logic and tone problems which you pointed out. I
thought readers of the blog should see your comments.

Let me know if this bugs you and I will remove it.

~~~
vasudeva
That strikes me as a particularly wierd thing to do in the absence of
attribution or explanation.

------
petercooper
I see Daniel's point. He's right. There _are_ people who don't like you for
bizarre reasons, for the same reason there are plain crazy folks out there you
can never hope to understand. Like one of his commenters, though, I think
these people are worth forgetting about rather than analyzing. Some people
you'll just _never_ get - and life's too short.

I tend to avoid confrontation and haven't had many incidents like Daniel's
(this is a big part of why I work solo) but even I've hit into it. I
positively reviewed a book on Amazon yet some third party guy I've never heard
of (and unrelated to the book) went crazy in the comments how he didn't like
me. Like.. WTF? So, yeah, let's write these people off to just being the crazy
side of life we'll never understand - life's kinda fun like that :)

------
desiderata
It's ridiculous to expect a recommendation when you have "different opinions
about software development" and actively shot the guy's plans down in
meetings. If you don't do things the way the guy likes, why would he recommend
you? "Here, hire this guy, he does things completely wrong from my point of
view."

------
ramanujan
One thing I noticed is that while there are quite a lot of posts on his site
about "agile" and "methodology" I see basically nothing in the way of
technical stuff (meaning working code) on his front page or in his tags list.

Sets off my spidey sense for PHB.

~~~
scotch_drinker
Really? Because a Scrumaster or an agile project manager who doesn't post code
immediately is irrelevant? That's an odd conclusion to make.

It seems clear to me after reading several of his posts that he manages
people. While it is certainly true that there are a subset of managers who are
also PHBs, I don't think you could highly correlate those who are and those
who aren't by the number of posts they make about working code.

If a person wrote nothing but posts about code and how it worked, no one would
ever disparage them because they weren't a manager. Why is it that people
disparage managers who don't write about code?

~~~
ramanujan
> Why is it that people disparage managers who don't write about code?

Because it increases the probability that they don't understand what they're
managing.

Look at Peter Norvig or Urs Hoelzle or Jeff Dean. They are still very, very
technical despite managing many people. That earns them credibility among
their troops.

By contrast, this guy has written about 70 posts on Agile with almost zero
code. I could find exactly three lines of code on his entire site under the F#
tag, though I didn't look that hard.

Bottom line is that he's unlikely to be someone who would earn an engineer's
technical respect.

~~~
raganwald
I agree that he's unlikely to be someone who would earn an engineer's
_technical_ respect. By any chance are there other competencies a manager of
technical projects ought to have?

~~~
ramanujan
Sure, but now we're talking about a programmer analog of Maslow's hierarchy of
needs.

The first trait of a manager in high tech (whether professor or product
manager) has to be technical competence.

That trait is not usually sufficient to be a good manager. But I think it's
necessary (you seem to disagree?)

~~~
petewarden
I would disagree. Many of the good managers I've worked under haven't had much
coding experience. What they have had is the ability to trust the team to get
them briefed on technical issues as they come up.

I could see this being different in other environments (eg I can't imagine a
research team manager not being an alpha geek) but for most corporate
environments there are a lot of other skills I'd look for before technical
competence.

For example, one of my inspirations early in my career was an EPM (engineering
project manager in the company's lingo) who had zero technical background.
What she did have was an amazing ability to listen to everyone involved in the
project, pick out the chains of dependencies, negotiate schedules with us,
follow up relentlessly on any open questions and summarize what we'd just said
better than we ever could. She made a massive difference, and the team's
productivity dropped like a stone when someone less talented took over.

------
rpcutts
I've never met the guy and I don't like him.

~~~
derefr
Honestly? Would you actually go up to him and say "I don't like you" if you
saw him, or are you just being an Internet Tough Guy?

~~~
rpcutts
Neither.

I don't randomly walk up to people and discuss my opinion of them. But if
someone started a conversation with me about how many people do or don't like
them then yes I would have to tell them I find them irritating and walk away.
There is nothing 'tough' about it.

Nor am I an Internet tough guy, just giving an opinion is all I'm doing.
People that obsess over who like them or not and why, I just don't like them.

------
akkartik
This seems related: [http://www.scottberkun.com/blog/2009/how-to-keep-your-
mouth-...](http://www.scottberkun.com/blog/2009/how-to-keep-your-mouth-shut)

"No matter how right you are, if you care about effecting change, you should
never open your mouth without some sense of who will agree with you and who
won’t."

------
CGamesPlay
This is an interesting article. I find myself disagreeing with the decisions
of my coworkers and supervisors frequently, and I argue my position, we come
to a conclusion, and that's the end. I don't take the fact that someone
disagreed with me personally, but I am always nervous that other people will.

------
cousin_it
I want to know, but do not know, what other people think of me; which of my
traits matter to them and which don't; what determines their reactions to my
words and deeds; and how a person can learn such things in general ("just
asking" obviously doesn't work). For looks we have sites like hotornot with
anonymous reviews and ratings, but what to do about personality?

~~~
gdp
I think it's actually relatively easy to figure out what people think about
you. If you do something, and a number of people react, you can generally
start to draw a "trend line" through the behaviours of different people
towards you over the course of some amount of time.

I think it's just important to pay attention.

------
jpcx01
Seems boneheaded for someone to even respond to an invite like that. If you
don't like someone much, and they invite you to connect with them or
something, just ignore the request. Simple and easy.

I would never see the gain of explicitly telling someone "no".

~~~
sirrocco
Well, if you're not answering I'm sending the invite again. And if still
nothing I'm calling you :).

Anyhow, I think it's polite to answer to a request - even if it is - "dude , I
never did like you, sorry"

~~~
gdp
Somebody who repeatedly sends invites and then calls is not going to get a
recommendation from me. If you are actually worthy of recommendation, people
will probably do them with very little encouragement.

Hounding people for recommendations will either lead to refusal (which will
inspire you to write a blog post about people who don't like you), or people
will write you a mildly insincere recommendation to avoid causing offence. At
that point, you should be grateful that your acquaintance has considerably
more social graces than you do.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
Actually the backstory to this post is pertinent here as well.

I sent him an email on an old personal email address a few weeks ago, pointing
out that we always didn't agree but we always respected and liked each other
and if he could spare a few kind words it would mean a lot to me. I didn't
receive a response.

I was reading a great book on consulting this week, and it pointed out that
you should take emotional chances with our work. Reach out to people
emotionally to find out where they are coming from.

About this same time, I noticed he recommended one of the other guys that was
on the team.

So I sent him another email at his work address -- basically a repeat of the
first email. I figured either he didn't get the first email or the answer was
no. And if the answer was no, I should find out why (which I plan on doing
when I get back) Either way, it was a win.

Of all things, I did not want an insincere recommendation. Rather I am
extremely curious as to why two people who are supposedly experts on teams
don't have the mutual respect it takes to point out and praise the positive
qualities of the other, even if they disagree. I imagine I somehow ticked the
fellow off to the point of hurt feelings, but if so, I am unaware of when that
happened. Like I said, on a personal level we always seemed to get along just
fine.

------
kunqiana
see Paul Graham's essay on See Randomness,
(<http://paulgraham.com/randomness.html>) it might or might not be true for
your case but personally it makes me feel better when I am in similar
situations by maybe seeing things in better perspective. A lot of times when I
am confused about someone's actions toward me I tend to think that it must be
about me and to make it worse I exaggerate it in my mind. Sometimes it isn't
rational to always expect a rational response from other humans. We are all
humans after all, and we make mistakes just like everyone else, a little
understanding goes a long way.

------
Confusion
As I've said over there, but will repeat here:

I don't understand how someone declining a request to write a recommendation
gets you to assume he dislikes you. He just doesn't want to recommend you.

I know plenty of people that I like and work with, but that I wouldn't want to
write a recommendation for. This is largely because I do not believe in
lauding someone's good sides without also addressing their shortcomings. The
latter will not be looked kindly upon in a recommendation. In short: I can not
honestly write a recommendation.

~~~
lsc
yeah. I dono. I mean, a lot of my verbal recommendations are "S/he is really
good at X, but has problem Y, and Would probably work well for the position
you have." I dono how that would always translate in 'on your permanent
record' type things. It's probably not even the best in person, sometimes.

I remember a few years back I was vacating a position as a contractor, and I
was asked for recommendations. So, at the time my business was contracting,
and I didn't really need as much help as I had. I recommended they hire one of
the guys who was working for me but it was a "well, he can do the job, but
here are what's wrong with him. I recommend you hire him"

The client didn't bite. later the body shop/recruiter who had gotten me the
gig asked for recommendations, and I said the same thing. Apparently he talked
the client into hiring my guy, and the client was pretty happy with the guy
for a year or so. (the client hired me again when the guy left.)

Would it have been better for the client if I was good at sales and able to
directly sell the guy? maybe.

(my other minor nit was that nobody gave me a kickback. Eh, I did get the guy
to work for me at way below market wages for a year or two, so I got something
out of it.)

But the upshot is when I give a recommendation, I see it as doing a favor to
the company or person that has the open position more than a favor to the
person I'm recommending. I mean, if I didn't think you were qualified, I
wouldn't have recommended you for the gig, right? sometimes my recommendations
are in the format "person X is perfect for the job, but you are unlikely to
catch his interest"

On LinkedIn, though, it is different. the recommendations are setup as if you
were doing a favor to the person you are recommending, which makes it much
harder for me. I mean, how much of the negative stuff do you put in? hell,
change the situation and a massive flaw becomes a massive advantage.

~~~
carbon8
My understanding is that you need to be very careful about saying anything
negative at all in a reference since it opens you up to a potential defamation
lawsuit, and that it's therefore prudent to either give a positive reference
or none at all.

------
edw519
_...most people could care less about me one way or the other -- but some
folks actively dislike me._

You never really know if you're pushing hard enough until you ruffle a few
feathers along the way.

I'd rather have a few folks "actively dislike me" than worry if I compromised
too many times over the years. I haven't and it sounds like you haven't
either. I think we're both doing fine.

Once I started getting glowing reviews from the clueless, then I'd start to
worry.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
_You never really know if you're pushing hard enough until you ruffle a few
feathers along the way._

I used to think if I worked hard enough, I could get anybody to like me. When
people didn't, I viewed it as some sort of personal mistake.

Now I'm thinking that random chance has a lot to do with it. The more people
you interact with, the more who are not going to like you -- there is always
going to be that 1-5%.

Oddly enough from this position I am beginning to see the logic of your point,
although I have never taken it to heart. The more real work you are doing, the
more people you interact with, the more change you make -- of course is going
to ruffle feathers. You can't help it.

------
jodrellblank
I want to highlight this paragraph:

 _I think the worst attribute any team member can have is not wanting to make
waves. In fact, I think it's the number one attribute I would actively seek
out to exclude from a team. Everybody has to work without nets on an agile
team. If we're not taking emotional chances and communicating, we're losing
ground._

Is this wisdom born from long experience or is it unwise naivety? Is there any
grounds for saying "if you want to encourage waves then you have to have an
environment where people wont fear being fired for sticking out. At all."?

I think actually having such an atmosphere and acceptance that everyone
_believes_ would be a lot harder than it sounds. Perhaps that's something that
startups have - the founders have equity in the company, they can't fire the
other founders and they can't be fired, so they have the freedom to do
whatever they think will make the company progress, and no particular benefit
(e.g. "not being fired") for not rocking the boat.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
There's a trick here. At the surface it sounds naive, sure.

The trick is that people can and should passionately defend and believe in the
viewpoints, espouse and defend them, and then go along with what the group
decides.

Either "passionately defending" or "going along" is not sufficient in itself.
You have to have both.

~~~
raganwald
There's a phrase for this, it's known as having _Strong beliefs, weakly held_.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
Thanks.

I'm stealing that one. (grin)

------
ahoyhere
Overly wordy and self-indulgent, and for all the navel-gazing, doesn't come to
a satisfying conclusion.

It's hard to say that communication problems are "a little bit of me, and a
little bit of them" if you go and say things like "Wow, you're a tall fucker!"
to new clients when you meet them. Y'know?

I can see how that might lead to a long dark night of the soul, but who wants
to read about it -- when it's written so hamfistedly?

~~~
mhb
_but who wants to read about it_

And why here?

~~~
alexgartrell
I'd argue some fraction of HN readers are, despite their brilliance, not
incredibly good with people. It's just more "It's not me, it's them" thinking,
and sort of masturbatory.

People love to upvote things that make them right, but I guess that's kind of
the idea.

