On: How we communicate

[jotaen]

I’m not sure I find this document to be a good example of careful and effective communication. Quite a few of those bullet points seem repetitive, and it feels more like someone flushed out their thoughts somewhat randomly, rather than trying to bring them into a clear and concise structure. I would personally prefer the main take-aways to be condensed into fewer points, each with some additional text for context and nuance. For a guide, I think I’d find that easier to grasp and memoize.

[j45 → jotaen]

Repetition can have a place in reinforcing a message. It's one message for everyone, not a message per person.

[mdekkers → jotaen]

It all boils down to “we don’t like talking” and im sure it’s a great place to work for some folks, but to me it sounds exhausting.

[dustedcodes → jotaen]

Agreed, it's even more irritating that the very first bullet point is grammatically wrong as well, further highlighting how poorly this whole "guide" has been communicated itself:

> You can not not communicate.

It's "cannot not".

[jiriro → dustedcodes]

You are wrong of course.

“Both cannot and can not are perfectly fine, but cannot is far more common” [1]

[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/cannot-vs-can-not-is...

[dustedcodes → jiriro]

I’ll stand corrected. I’m not a native English speaker and when I saw “can not” it immediately reminded me of my school teacher in Europe who was very particular about these things and teaching us as wrong. Even as I typed my response now my iPhone tries to autocorrect it to cannot, so I genuinely thought it was wrong. TIL I guess.