
Non-obvious remote work techniques - rbanffy
https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3417752
======
PinkMilkshake
> makes the mute button easier to find

It's odd this is still an issue. I'm not sure why the mute button is not
featured more prominently on videochat apps. It's almost the primary feature
during a call that makes things go smoothly.

Also, there's always one guy who has to say every bloody time, "are you there,
have you forgot to unmute?" if you fail to unmute and start talking <100ms
after your name has been mentioned.

~~~
RJIb8RBYxzAMX9u
Just use a headset with a physical mute button. I've been using this pair[0]
for years. It works great.

[0] [https://www.logitech.com/en-us/product/wireless-
headset-h800](https://www.logitech.com/en-us/product/wireless-headset-h800)

~~~
ThePadawan
I do this and it has downsides:

* muting yourself is not clearly visible to the conference app (Your face doesn't get a mic with a strikethrough on the screen). Apps that warn you that your audio device is receiving audio but you are muted on the application level no longer work correctly.

* some apps (Looking at you, Teams) will actually complain that you seem to have deactivated your audio device (of course you did - that's the whole point).

~~~
iofiiiiiiiii
This is only a problem with headsets that have poor drivers.

Better devices like Jabra headsets integrate directly with Teams and will
actually synchronize mute status between the headset and Teams!

~~~
ThePadawan
Cool!

YMMV but 0 of my WFH colleagues own business-grade headsets though. Some have
Airpods, and most use Gaming headsets (like I do) or Bose QuietComfort (which
IIRC don't have dedicated mute buttons).

Until we find a unified API around all those devices, a prescribed unified
usage pattern IMO doesn't make sense yet.

~~~
WorldMaker
Eventually companies will realize they should spend or reimburse to upgrade
"home office" equipment to "business-grade".

------
fishtoaster
I feel like "Accurate Chat Status" only works if it's automatic (as in, a
calendar integration that switches your status to "in a meeting" or "it's
after 6pm, probably afk.)

Otherwise you get:

4pm: "Ah, bob's status says he's in a meeting. I could message him, but I'd
like this to be a quick, synchronous, chat discussion."

5pm: "Guess bob's still in a meeting..."

7pm: "Let me check - yep, still 'in a meeting'"

10pm: "Yeah, he forgot to update his status"

And then you never trust those statuses again.

~~~
dahart
For me automatic idle+meeting detection is not good enough. There are lots of
times when I can't chat immediately, but I'm using my computer and not in a
scheduled meeting. Pair programming, someone else at my desk (pre covid),
programming in the zone, watching a presentation, currently chatting with
someone else, etc. etc.

I want the _expectation_ that my Slack icon is green to mean that I'm at work
and I'll reply sometime today, not that I'm ready for you to interrupt what
I'm doing right now.

~~~
bjo590
Simply don't replay immediately. You'll build the expectations as people learn
to work with you. Some people on my team respond immediately 95% of the time.
Some people on my team turn off all slack notifications and check it
throughout the day. We all work together pretty well.

~~~
vladvasiliu
I completely agree that there shouldn't be an expectation of an immediate
reply and rather expect the exchage to be asynchronous. However, that renders
to whole "presence indicator" moot, which is the subject of this particular
thread.

If I try to talk to Bob and the expectation is that he might take a while to
get back to me, it doesn't make any difference to know that he's "available"
or "in a meeting". If he's available and coding he might not anwer for an
hour. If he's in a meeting and bored he might answer right away.

------
dahart
> Accurate Chat Status > In meatspace you don't walk up to someone's desk and
> just start talking.

This list seems to assume or suggest that chat should only be used for
synchronous conversation... Are there reasons to avoid using chat
asyncronously?

My assumption is that chat can be asynchronous, but I recognize many people
don’t want to ask their question until I’m actively responding. I can imagine
security concerns, like someone doesn’t want their question to be read by
people near me or someone wandering by my desk while I’m away...

But, my status as to whether I can chat synchronously changes dozens of times
per day, and I don’t particularly want to have to manually toggle my status
when I’m on the phone or when I’m chatting with someone else, or when I’m in
the middle of coding and prefer to answer your “quick question” later, since
it will inevitably require a 10 minute conversation. Quick to ask is often not
quick to answer.

~~~
vsareto
If you're doing incident response or on-call work, I think it needs to be more
synchronous and more accurate. However, chat messages are more natural to me
to indicate availability than setting the availability itself. Too many people
don't set accurate statuses and it can get changed by the programs own rules,
so it's a noisy signal IMO.

~~~
rendaw
If you're doing incident response or on-call people don't contact you based on
your availability, you guarantee your availability so people can contact you.

------
solids
#5 - IMHO you just can’t emulate a physical social event, the biggest problem
being that you cannot establish smaller groups which are natural in physical
events.

~~~
MauranKilom
I recently participated in C++ on Sea
([https://cpponsea.uk/](https://cpponsea.uk/)) - online, of course. The
conference setup used
[https://remo.co/conference/](https://remo.co/conference/) which automatically
groups people into tables, where each table is essentially a video conference
call. You can move around freely between tables but each table can only hold 8
people.

I felt it was possibly _better_ than a physical conference because it's so
simple to join new conversations - no walking around looking for interesting
groups (you can see who is currently sitting at each table) and none of the
nonverbal social awkwardness in joining a conversation. Plus you always have
the names and profiles right there. Never been easier to meet people imo.

I'd contradict your claim based on this experience. You clearly can establish
small groups, and it seems to work really well when you do.

------
cbhl
I love the quick chat protocol. It's a concrete example of what to do, instead
of just saying "please don't just say hi".

I think there is one good strong counterpoint to it -- it is if there is a
chance that the words "tomato incident" will be screencast to a meeting
containing execs and/or external clients. Some people operate in "hello
protocol" all day, and for them, I find it easier to just let the extra round
trips happen.

Similarly, if I have access to a colleague's calendar, I usually check it
before I initiate a quick chat protocol message, to avoid the same failure
mode.

------
ktal
#3 - Holy hell I hate it when someone sends me a message with just "Hi". Just
tell me what you want!

~~~
ypeter
What I do is just not respond until they say what they want from me.

And I also do this when someone just pastes an error message without a
question.

~~~
renewiltord
Well, that sounds logical. I do the same, too.

1\. Current work

2\. Today work

3\. Review for when work

4\. Far future work

Everything in 1 and 2 are lined up for work. Anything without clear action
items requires follow-up and clearly signals non-urgency so it's in 3 which is
the end of the day. And a 4 is just intentionally forgotten.

If you stick that in your github.com/username/me/README.md then it's
documented behaviour.

------
robotkad
Does anyone have any suggestions on a platform to facilitate Tip #4: Idling in
a Videoconference Room? Zoom is the obvious choice, but wonder if anyone has
built something better for this use case?

~~~
renewiltord
I have friends who ran a startup full remote. They sat on Discord together all
day. Video off most of the time.

~~~
anon9001
I don't know that non-gamers would understand idling in a
discord/mumble/ventrilo/teamspeak server, but it's for sure the next big trend
in remote work. I've been hanging out this way with friends for a long time.

I won't be surprised to see Discord pivot to b2b in a few years and completely
destroy Slack.

~~~
killerdhmo
Kevin Kwok agrees: [https://kwokchain.com/2019/08/16/the-arc-of-
collaboration/](https://kwokchain.com/2019/08/16/the-arc-of-collaboration/)

------
blunte
Is there a good reason why ACM can't make their site readable for the largest
group of computers in the world - mobile devices?

~~~
Kaze404
Works fine for me on Firefox, and I can even use Reader mode.

~~~
blunte
For me, with Firefox on Android, it delivered what appeared to be a desktop
site (tiny text, clearly non-mobile layout). I almost never encounter that on
websites, so the problem is not with me nor my phone. My phone is a Note 8
(still reasonably high performance and with a very large screen).

It's nice that it works for you, and sure I could try reader mode, but I
should not have to switch to reader mode to view a website.

------
dutch3000
stopped reading after tip #1. so lame. not practical at all.

------
icelancer
_Me: Hi!

You: Hi._

Absolutely not. Just say what you want.

~~~
ergl
The article lists that as an example of what _not_ to do

