On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 09:22:41 +0000, Invisible wrote:

> The net result of this is that the IT Director receives roughly 900
> emails *per day*, most of them nothing to do with anything. And the
> result of *that* is that if you send the IT Director an email of more
> than about six syllables, he'll read the first sentence and send a reply
> to that - which usually result in him asking a question which is
> answered two lines further down the email you originally sent.
> 
> This is severely exasperating.

Yep, I see that myself on occasion.  That's one of the reasons that I've 
started shortening my communications (over the past several *years*).  No 
point in answering a question at the outset when you're going to be asked 
it later and make the person asking feel stupid by saying "if you read 
the first message on this topic, that question is answered".

My director has started having me do more staff presentations lately, and 
generally asks me to do 3-4 slides to summarize the point.  The end 
result (which is what she was really going for) was that I get much more 
concise in my explanations and don't drag the discussion out.  That's 
been a very useful tool.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 09:29:14 +0000, Invisible wrote:

> I like to delude myself that this is one of the things I'm good at.

It wouldn't surprise me to find out that is the case.  What you wrote 
after this quoted sentence confirms it, actually.  You understand your 
audience, and that's the most important thing to any writing one does.

People who write and don't know their audience frequently miss the mark, 
and it shows in the reactions to what they've written.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> I like to delude myself that this is one of the things I'm good at.
> 
> It wouldn't surprise me to find out that is the case.  What you wrote 
> after this quoted sentence confirms it, actually.  You understand your 
> audience, and that's the most important thing to any writing one does.
> 
> People who write and don't know their audience frequently miss the mark, 
> and it shows in the reactions to what they've written.

Sometimes the hardest thing is figuring out why you're actually writing 
something. Like, I mean, I *know* I have to write this policy. But *who* 
is actually going to read it, and why?

But, IMHO, *the* hardest thing is figuring out all the stuff your 
audience doesn't know that happens to be trivially obvious to you. Like, 
I've read *so many* projects on SourceForge that tell you about all the 
fantastic features this software has but doesn't actually say... what... 
it... does! >_<

It's like describing The Gimp by saying "This program is 100% free and 
has powerful features such as Gaussian blur, edge detection and supports 
multiple colourspaces". Yes, but... WHAT IS IT FOR??

The person writing this is so busy trying to tell you all the cool stuff 
that they're completely missed the fact that an outsider might not have 
even the vaguest clue what the software is for. This is so trivially 
obvious to them that they've completely forgotten about it.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:

>> Hate dumb people.
> 
> Only if they are trying to a job which they are not skilled enough for, 
> and then I really don't hate them, just the manager that put them there.

Even if they got there by pretending to know stuff they don't?

Actually, wait - any half-decent manager should still be able to spot 
this one. OK, you win the point.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>> The main problem I see with email exchanges is this:  people don't like to read.
> 
>> Nerds like you and me, yes, general population, no.  Doesn't matter if you have
>> a clear text with everything needed covered and explained in minute detail:
>> people just won't read and will eventually phone you to talk "about the email".
> 
>   With regular people that might be understandable, but with people whose
> *job* is to read emails and respond to them (eg. technical support) I think
> it's inexcusable.

My favourit is when you email (say) the technical support for your ISP, 
saying "I know you offer features X, but I'm looking for something 
similar but slightly different" and they reply with "hey, have you heard 
about feature X?" And you're like "um, did you even ****ing READ what I 
wrote?"

Then again, these poor people are usually being paid peanuts to handle 
thousands of emails per hour. So I guess we shouldn't be too harsh on 
them. It's not their fault that ISPs and similar companies don't invest 
in hiring the propper number of staff and training them adequatly...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Then again, these poor people are usually being paid peanuts to handle 
> thousands of emails per hour. So I guess we shouldn't be too harsh on 
> them.

  Yeah, it's impossible to know whether the answer was generic and useless
because the technical support guy was just being lazy, or because he is
honestly trying to help but is so busy with the hundreds of emails he is
getting that he simply doesn't have the time to scrutinize all the minor
details in every single one of them.

  In the latter case responding harshly is certainly not going to help his
day to get better.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:4b6893de$1@news.povray.org...
> Sometimes the hardest thing is figuring out why you're
actually writing
> something. Like, I mean, I *know* I have to write this
policy. But *who*
> is actually going to read it, and why?

Last year, my boss ordered me (in a very nasty tone) to
write something he couldn't define. When I asked him who was
going to read it, he told me it was none of my business... I
asked him why he needed such a document. He again said it
was none of my business. We went round and round on it... I
never wrote it... He hasn't spoken to me in over a year now.

Post a reply to this message

DungBeatle wrote:

> Last year, my boss ordered me (in a very nasty tone) to
> write something he couldn't define. When I asked him who was
> going to read it, he told me it was none of my business... I
> asked him why he needed such a document. He again said it
> was none of my business. We went round and round on it... I
> never wrote it... He hasn't spoken to me in over a year now.

Sounds like you got a good deal out of it!

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:4b689c97$1@news.povray.org...
> DungBeatle wrote:
> > never wrote it... He hasn't spoken to me in over a year
now.
> Sounds like you got a good deal out of it!

I don't like problems like this. I much prefer easy, open
discussion. I love doing my job, it's people that suck...

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> fantastic features this software has but doesn't actually say... what... 
> it... does! >_<

I like the ones that say "use this feature just like the way it was three 
versions ago, only with a new name!"

Sort of like if POV 3.6 was documented in terms of differences from POV 3.1.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
   I get "focus follows gaze"?

Post a reply to this message