[papaf]

I disagree with a lot of this article because it assumes that we are efficient robots that just need things to be searchable and written down. Tools are also a bit lacking -- in theory writing stuff in a wiki is useful but then try finding the information with, say, Confluence search.

The article also assumes every one is a native speaker who can write quickly and clearly in a chat -- in a lot of international projects this is not the case.

I find that there is less chance for misunderstanding and aggression if you disagree over a video call. Also, human contact and informal communication make life and working more enjoyable.

[thaumasiotes]

> The article also assumes every one is a native speaker who can write quickly and clearly in a chat -- in a lot of international projects this is not the case.

You think non-native speakers have an easier time communicating in real time in a video call than through text? A video call is the worst case for a non-native speaker.

(Well, OK, a phone call is even worse. But being synchronous and relying on their ability to understand the spoken language are both terrible ideas if you're concerned about what makes things easy for non-native speakers.)

[nottorp]

> You think non-native speakers have an easier time communicating in real time in a video call than through text? A video call is the worst case for a non-native speaker.

Oh yea, I forgot about this because I don't do video/audio calls.

A non native speaker is NOT exposed to spoken english daily. In some countries they even dub Hollywood movies so not even their entertainment is in english. And where movies are subtitled you tend to read the subtitles so you don't bother understanding accents, speech over explosions and stuff like that.

Written english is another thing, if you do programming. There's no point of looking for docs in your native language; the originals are in english and always more up to date.

So maybe the non native speakers have trouble because the OP speaks too fast / has an unfamiliar accent?

[zhte415]

Phone calls are better, as no one can see the group on the other end looking at each other in bemusement (if in a meeting room) or in a group IM chat (if not all in the same place) asking each other what the hell the speaker is talking about (was talking about, as the speaker's often moved on). That's assuming anyone not interested has not taken a bathroom break.

Sarcasm I hope detected.

Speaking in an international environment is a skill. It's not just about (I think the term is) paralinquistics (speed, accent, volume, etc), it's about thinking about who else is in the conversation.

[masklinn]

> I disagree with a lot of this article because it assumes that we are efficient robots that just need things to be searchable and written down.

It assumes no such thing. If anything it assumes the opposite of your assertion, that we are not perfectly efficient robots able to instantaneously and fully recall the content of transient discussions. Written content is perennial and searchable, so it can be retrieved in the future if necessary without being limited by human foibles and memory.

Even if the search is bad and the system is not especially designed for it, I regularly manage to find information I dimly recall through search in discord and friends, something which would be entirely impossible using video calls. IME that is in fact a regular issue, people asserting that things were told during discussions and there's no way to confirm it, have context, … because the discussion was a voice / video call.

> The article also assumes every one is a native speaker who can write quickly and clearly in a chat -- in a lot of international projects this is not the case.

Have you been in that scenario, ever? Video calls are infinitely worse than typed text between non-native speakers. And if the call is not going to be in english… why would the written communication be so?

> I find that there is less chance for misunderstanding and aggression if you disagree over a video call.

I find that there are regular shouting matches over video calls, and collisions between speakers makes the experience miserable. It's also impossible to dive in and out and recover the information, if you arrive on a group discussion midway you can read the history, if you dive out for a bit you can read what you missed. On a video call, it's gone.

> Also, human contact and informal communication make life and working more enjoyable.

To you.

[acatnamedjoe]

If there are "regular shouting matches" going on in any form of meeting then I would suggest the organisation in question has cultural problems way beyond the communication tool being used.

[papaf]

Have you been in that scenario, ever? Video calls are infinitely worse than typed text between non-native speakers. And if the call is not going to be in english… why would the written communication be so?

I am in this scenario every work day as a non-native speaker. I much prefer talking to people than trying to get the text correct.

[foldr]

While there may be some people who don’t enjoy human contact, I think it’s a little unfair to suggest that this is some kind of idiosyncratic preference of the original poster. It’s a basic human need. Most people who work full time will want to have some kind of social contact within working hours.

[nottorp]

It's also implying that you do need to train a bit to work efficiently in a distributed team.

> The article also assumes every one is a native speaker who can write quickly and clearly in a chat -- in a lot of international projects this is not the case.

These are two different things. Native speaker is one, having the skill of writing quicky and clearly is another. They're unrelated. Both are trainable. Not to mention that in my experience it's the native speakers (of English i guess?) have the worst spelling :)

> Also, human contact and informal communication make life and working more enjoyable.

And... informal communication has to be in a video call? It can't be in writing?

As for the human contact, I do recommend having a social life outside work. Distributed or not distributed work.

Source of statements: been working in distributed teams for 20 years, not since this pandemic.

[papaf]

And... informal communication has to be in a video call? It can't be in writing?

On video calls and in meatspace, you get to see peoples facial expressions, their smiles, they can move their hands and make gestures. I much prefer that to text.

As for the human contact, I do recommend having a social life outside work. Distributed or not distributed work.

You are correct but, personally, I think spending 8 hours a day without seeing faces is too much.

[tluyben2]

We work with people from all over the world, most not native speaking. For technical stuff, in our experience, voice or video calls are the most inefficient thing possible. Because spoken bad English is far worse than written, a lot of people have less than optimal internet bandwidth and latency and, worst, after the call the details are kind of lost. So first writing the main points in chat, if then some people (usually this is 1 person) want a call, we do a call and then flesh the details out over chat and in docs/wiki.

Informal comms is also via chat; far more so then in video as, because of the overchatter and bad connections, jokes and quips get lost far easier.

Ymmv of course but we avoid vid/voice like the plague, so far it hurt us with large amounts of miscommunication and time loss.

By the way, been doing this and like this for 25 years now.

[nottorp]

> By the way, been doing this and like this for 25 years now.

Yeah, he must be new to distributed work :)

[smallerfish]

> in theory writing stuff in a wiki is useful but then try finding the information with, say, Confluence search.

If the company/team wiki isn't organized to optimize for browsing to relevant documentation, then you might as well use google docs (which excels at search and is terrible for browsability).

A reasonable percentage of effort documenting something in a wiki should be devoted to making sure that people actually can find it, otherwise you're in cleaning-closet-in-disused-bathroom territory.

[Aeolun]

> I find that there is less chance for misunderstanding and aggression if you disagree over a video call.

If you put me in a video call with someone not more or less capable of communicating in our chosen common language I can practically guarantee that I’m going to want to murder them.

There’s nothing worse than sitting on a long call waiting for someone to finally understand what button you want them to click. Even better if you have 500ms delay too.

[marcodave]

500ms ? you have it lucky , try 2000ms next time for real frustration. Bonus points if you can hear yourself back unless the recipient is muting him/herself

[f6v]

The assumption that text is always superior to a sync conversation is too strong. Often you get the crucial bits by interrupting someone mid discussion and asking for specifics.

[baash05]

But you can do that in text too. I mean if it's wall of text dump, no; but if people keep their chat blocks short, then it's a two way convo. (or more)

[throwaway98797]

Text suffers from being precise but accurate.

Voice is accurate but not precise.

Different problems are resolved better by one than the other.

Brain storming better in voice. Technical details of an app that needs to be coded, writting is better.

[the_gipsy]

The article assumes that we are NOT efficient robots that can store any and all information that we get in our heads.