Hacker News Reader

Comment by cperciva | Hacker News Reader

"Hey pretty cool program! Its a great start. I bet we can make it run faster if we changed the way files are imported to something like this... nice work"

I usually hear this referred to as a "criticism sandwich": Criticism surrounded on either side with compliments.

View on HN

We Brits are the masters of allusive and indirect speech, and I would automatically automatically strip of both pieces of bread translate that to "you're reading in files wrong".

Yes, I would automatically parse the "bread" as being boilerplate politeness -- but as with most forms of politeness, I would probably feel differently about the speaker if it wasn't there.

Not everyone auto-parses. Unless you really know who you're talking to, it makes sense to add the "bread/condiments" to the sandwich.

I think you have to take each individual differently. Most folks react well to the criticism sandwich. Someone like you might prefer a more direct approach, as long as it is not phrased in a mean way.

At some point in my career, I stopped taking criticism personally. I just realized I was wrong so often that upholding the pretense that I knew it all was too hard. For that reason, I prefer direct suggestions.

If I was teaching a child or a new beginner, I would start with a lot of praise that they're even trying. I want to get them some early wins to help boost their confidence.

In the martial arts community we call this "praise, correct, praise."

What's weird is that even though I know this is a "trick" I still want people to talk to me that way unless I specifically ask them for the hard truth.

Programmers tend to incline towards efficiency. I think that's why we often skip the bread and deliver only the filling. IMO there's a big difference between a criticism sandwich and tactful criticism.

on the other hand, would you like to work with someone that doesn't take criticism well and whom jumps on the defensive about random pieces of code, of all things?

"Inclining towards efficiency" might be their justification, but I think the truth is closer to many programmers simply lacking tact.

S/he said, bluntly.

Delivering constructive criticism in a polite and non-abrasive way is more efficient. If abruptly telling someone their wrong causes them to take offense to the help you're trying to provide, they'll likely disregard what you've just told them out of pride or spite and you'll reduce their willingness to work with you on future problems.

By being polite you're ensuring that the message you're sending gets incorporated into their strategy for tackling that problem and making them feel comfortable discussing other issues with you.

As programmers, we have to learn that 'programming' people is very different from programming computers.

Efficiency is one thing, being a douche is another. Programmers are still human beings and while they might tolerate some harsher comments, they still affect them. Efficiency yes, but not above all.

Canadian Snowboard Instructors call that "Positive, to and try" i.e.

That's great! To make it read files faster, next time let's try xyz.

I think the key is to give an honest compliment on not a bullshit one. So instead of "great job on the thing! but ..." maybe "great job finding and diagnosing the root cause of that problem, that was pretty hairy, but I think there's a better way to fix the root cause".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com