Words are simple, short and yet can evoke so many emotions.
Case in point (from the way back files) : The words "Won't Fix". This originated from a QA engineer that has created an issue for modification to how a feature operated. Fair enough. The request was talked about and decided that this modification would not be implemented. The issue was closed with the QA engineer using the words, "Won't Fix".
Simple words but they express much about the perception of the QA engineer. "Won't Fix" seems to indicate that 1) the feature is broken and 2) the development engineer is ignoring a known error. Of course the perception from development engineer may have been that 1) the feature operates as expected and 2) making the suggested change would not be beneficial to the product.
So much in a simple word.
So how simple can a word be and still contain so much subjectivity and emotion behind it?
"Hacked" - That code is "hacked" together.
"Best Practice" - My solution is the "Best Practice".
"Buggy" - That code is "Buggy".
These words tend to shutdown and prevent discussion of the issue at hand, as they try to promote a position as fact to direct a conversation in a specific direction (per the speaker). In some cases the above statements may be true, but they are also overused by developers to promote a specific (and many times very subject) viewpoint.
Words are tied to emotions and beliefs, with even the use of very simple words exposing the human behind the conversation. It's not that some engineers do this, it's that all humans do this. The trick is to accept that we do this and work to both minimize this behavior in ourselves and work around this when it comes from others.
Simple words but they express much about the perception of the QA engineer. "Won't Fix" seems to indicate that 1) the feature is broken and 2) the development engineer is ignoring a known error. Of course the perception from development engineer may have been that 1) the feature operates as expected and 2) making the suggested change would not be beneficial to the product.
So much in a simple word.
So how simple can a word be and still contain so much subjectivity and emotion behind it?
"Hacked" - That code is "hacked" together.
"Best Practice" - My solution is the "Best Practice".
"Buggy" - That code is "Buggy".
These words tend to shutdown and prevent discussion of the issue at hand, as they try to promote a position as fact to direct a conversation in a specific direction (per the speaker). In some cases the above statements may be true, but they are also overused by developers to promote a specific (and many times very subject) viewpoint.
Words are tied to emotions and beliefs, with even the use of very simple words exposing the human behind the conversation. It's not that some engineers do this, it's that all humans do this. The trick is to accept that we do this and work to both minimize this behavior in ourselves and work around this when it comes from others.
Comments
Post a Comment