It is not what you say, but how you say it
September 24 2007 12:34:34 AM
Add/Read Comments [21]
Long time readers of my blog may recall that over the last few years, around this time (the Jewish Holidays of Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur) I tend to get a little reflective. I think about some of the things that are bothering me, and write a blog entry to help clear my mind, and share my thoughts with you. Based on certain upsetting behaviors and situations I've witnessed during the last year or so (in our Lotus community), here are the three topics I'd like to discuss.
#1. We're not in high school any more.
#2. There really is grey.
#3. It is not what you say, but how you say it.
First up, there seem to be certain cliques forming. For almost every blog thread I read, before even scanning down the discussion I can usually guess who is going to side with whom. If person (or company) A says something, I know X,Y, and Z are going to agree with them whole heartily. If person (or company) B says something, P,Q, and R will certainly agree with them. And never, never, never will persons A and B agree! I see this happening with Lotus specific topics, when discussing Lotus versus the competition, as well as a variety of other emotion provoking issues in our industry like open standards, feature wars, market share, etc. I can understand why this happens. The people forming these cliques most likely see things the same way, so logically they support each other. I'd really like to see people break away from their expected behaviors from time to time. That might occasionally mean agreeing with (or even complimenting) "the other side". It might mean going against "the company line" from time to time. And sometimes it might mean putting your ego in check long enough to say something that contradicts the on-line image you might believe people have of you.
Second, the world is not just black or white, or perhaps for the computer folks, not everything is a 1 or a 0. That is not how the real world works. Far too often I witness people unable to accept that things change, or that something they once believed is no longer valid. Guess what. Microsoft is not always evil. Google is not always the model for the new world. Apple is not always the best or easiest. Lotus does not just equal Domino. Web 2.0 things are not always cool. Web 2.0 things are not always a waste of time. The list goes on and on. It is extremely frustrating to me to read so many opinionated posts and comments where people absolutely refuse to bend their beliefs, or to accept that someone other than themselves may be right. Please, please, please... open your mind (and your heart) and from time to time, try and see things from another point of view, you may just learn something.
Which takes me to this year's final (and most important) item...
There is an old saying "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all". I don't think that is necessarily true. Instead, I prefer the saying "It is not what you say, but how you say it."
Those that know me, know that I try and be a very positive person. I feel blessed with my family, my friends, my job, and the various communities I am a part of. I try and share my optimism and enthusiasm with those around me. For me, the answer to the rhetorical question "Is the glass half empty or half full?" is an obvious "half full". I strongly believe in karma, and feel that the world (which we all contribute to) would be a better place with less negativity. You might think something you say or do is of little consequence, but a lot of little things can quickly add up.
Don't misunderstand me. I DO NOT believe that IBMers, partners, customers, press, etc. should only talk about the good things Lotus is doing and leave out their questions, their criticisms, and their concerns. Those are all equally (and sometimes more) important than praise and cheering. Ask any of the Lotus product managers, marketing managers, interface designers, or code developers how critical I can be of things! Where I find myself EXTREMELY frustrated at times is the manner in which people sometimes phrase (or frame) their negativity. This could be as simple as the items they choose to fixate on, and the items they choose to ignore. The issues they like to provoke, and the facts they like to leave out.
Again, don't get me wrong. Sensitive topics should be approached. Difficult questions should be asked. Contrary opinion should be voiced. However, try and think about the phrase "It is not what you say, but how you say it.". I think the world in general would be a much happier place if people kept that in mind.
Alright, I've written, and edited this about 100 times now. I'm a much better talker than writer, but I hope the words above have captured some of the essence of what I am trying to convey. While you may not agree with everything I've said, I hope this has at least provide you with some things to think about. Time for me to get to bed!
#1. We're not in high school any more.
#2. There really is grey.
#3. It is not what you say, but how you say it.
First up, there seem to be certain cliques forming. For almost every blog thread I read, before even scanning down the discussion I can usually guess who is going to side with whom. If person (or company) A says something, I know X,Y, and Z are going to agree with them whole heartily. If person (or company) B says something, P,Q, and R will certainly agree with them. And never, never, never will persons A and B agree! I see this happening with Lotus specific topics, when discussing Lotus versus the competition, as well as a variety of other emotion provoking issues in our industry like open standards, feature wars, market share, etc. I can understand why this happens. The people forming these cliques most likely see things the same way, so logically they support each other. I'd really like to see people break away from their expected behaviors from time to time. That might occasionally mean agreeing with (or even complimenting) "the other side". It might mean going against "the company line" from time to time. And sometimes it might mean putting your ego in check long enough to say something that contradicts the on-line image you might believe people have of you.
Second, the world is not just black or white, or perhaps for the computer folks, not everything is a 1 or a 0. That is not how the real world works. Far too often I witness people unable to accept that things change, or that something they once believed is no longer valid. Guess what. Microsoft is not always evil. Google is not always the model for the new world. Apple is not always the best or easiest. Lotus does not just equal Domino. Web 2.0 things are not always cool. Web 2.0 things are not always a waste of time. The list goes on and on. It is extremely frustrating to me to read so many opinionated posts and comments where people absolutely refuse to bend their beliefs, or to accept that someone other than themselves may be right. Please, please, please... open your mind (and your heart) and from time to time, try and see things from another point of view, you may just learn something.
Which takes me to this year's final (and most important) item...
There is an old saying "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all". I don't think that is necessarily true. Instead, I prefer the saying "It is not what you say, but how you say it."
Those that know me, know that I try and be a very positive person. I feel blessed with my family, my friends, my job, and the various communities I am a part of. I try and share my optimism and enthusiasm with those around me. For me, the answer to the rhetorical question "Is the glass half empty or half full?" is an obvious "half full". I strongly believe in karma, and feel that the world (which we all contribute to) would be a better place with less negativity. You might think something you say or do is of little consequence, but a lot of little things can quickly add up.
Don't misunderstand me. I DO NOT believe that IBMers, partners, customers, press, etc. should only talk about the good things Lotus is doing and leave out their questions, their criticisms, and their concerns. Those are all equally (and sometimes more) important than praise and cheering. Ask any of the Lotus product managers, marketing managers, interface designers, or code developers how critical I can be of things! Where I find myself EXTREMELY frustrated at times is the manner in which people sometimes phrase (or frame) their negativity. This could be as simple as the items they choose to fixate on, and the items they choose to ignore. The issues they like to provoke, and the facts they like to leave out.
Again, don't get me wrong. Sensitive topics should be approached. Difficult questions should be asked. Contrary opinion should be voiced. However, try and think about the phrase "It is not what you say, but how you say it.". I think the world in general would be a much happier place if people kept that in mind.
Alright, I've written, and edited this about 100 times now. I'm a much better talker than writer, but I hope the words above have captured some of the essence of what I am trying to convey. While you may not agree with everything I've said, I hope this has at least provide you with some things to think about. Time for me to get to bed!
Great post Alan, advice that we should all follow (but sometimes find it hard to do so)...
Although I agree with 90% of your posting, I like to focus on the one that I disagree with.. Like so many things in life, most people tend to focus on the things they don't approve of: The good ones among us, use that focus to improve things, the others simply complain and do/achieve nothing constructive.
In my humble opinion, depending on your goals and audience, it definitely varies whether it is all about the content or the way it is delivered.. The nature of the modern ways of communicating often require an extra 'layer' to the message, to establish the credentials of the sender, while in the old days, the personal interaction of people and the knowledge of their previous actions (It's Jim, from Accounts: he says it in your face, exactly as it is..) supplied the context on how to interpret the message. Nowadays we don't really know the person delivering the message, so the content is colored/interpreted only with the experiences of the receiver without the additional back ground info. It IS however still about the CONTENT, but one must not forget to deliver the required context to be able to make it clear what is meant by the sender.
It's obviously a good thing, if one manages to put things in perspective, and look at all the good things from time to time, to than digg in and resolve the things that need improving ;-)
Bravo. Hear, hear. And a resounding "I agree" from me.
/me wonders what particular issue set Alan's mind to thinking along these lines.
"I'd really like to see people break away from their expected behaviors from time to time."
Really? If it's contradictory to prior opinions held, then it's either hypocrisy, or you changed your mind completely.
"Consistency is the hobgoblin of a little mind," right? Well, if your mind's not little, then consistency isn't a hobgoblin. It is the right and proper approach -- as long as your thoughts were well-considered in the first place.
But the portrayal of some online 'persona' is mostly inexcusable. Say what YOU mean, not what your audience expects. Otherwise you're just a slave to other people's opinions of you.
That is a sad state for a human to be in.
I might wonder whether you're considering me cliquish, Alan, except... it doesn't matter. I'll not be altering my behavior one iota based on a reader's opinion of me. Only MY opinion of me.
Isn't that the point?
Well we should know who will agree and disagree with you right :-)
Thank you for saying this, Alan. Individually we have to set boundaries of what is acceptable to us, and as a community we have to self-police and let people know when they're being hostile or overly offensive. I've gotten a couple of those messages myself. :)
Nathan... " what particular issue set Alan's mind to thinking along these lines". There is no one particular event. My thoughts are based on a combination of many things, several of which are not just the obvious Notes/Domino related blog postings which I think you might be assuming. Things like the ODF vs. OOXML battle. Competitive arguments on LinkedIn. Slashdot in general. (I don't read it). Meetings with press or customers who have already made up their mind on any given topic. Any debate (including those within IBM) where people a) don't get Domino, or b) are instantly anti anything but Domino. Seeing friends who now work at other companies drinking the koolaide. The overuse of buzzwords such as Web 2.0 or Ajax. Bigoted iPhone users who won't admit to the device's faults. Many many more things. This post was not done in haste, nor was it easy for me to write. Also, incase I was not clear, I don't consider myself above any of the items I wrote. Actually, quite the contrary. I've probably been guilty of all of them, hence the desire to clear my mind and soul.
Interesting.
To a large extent this is pretty normal behaviour in groups. It's very easy for people to get ingrained in certain view points and the cognitive dissonance caused by challenging those beliefs can be very hard to overcome. The first step to overcoming cognitive dissonance is to know that it exists. This enables you to reset and re-evaluate your position more easily.
People should obviously be courteous to each other, and in the main I think this community is pretty good at that. I don't think that means that you can't have vigorous debate. On the contrary, I prefer people to take a position and argue why they believe in that position. I'll argue the other side if I think you are wrong. I hope that in doing that I attack the argument, not the person making it. Now and then someone will make a point that makes me reconsider my position. It's actually quite cool when that happens.
Kerr
Kerr, I agree people should be curious (Update: this was a spelling error, I meant to say courteous as pointed out on the comment below. Thanks Kerr.), but not just to each other. I think that extends to being courteous to companies, to the industry, to anything. People should just be courteous period. There is no harm in being nice! Arguments, disagreements, different points of view are all absolutely fine and fit into that picture. It is the manner that they occur in that sometimes bothers me. Blindly ranting. Intentionally provoking. Purposefully misleading. Focusing on just certain facts you find convenient for your purposes. These are things I see happening that I wish would stop.
Alan, well I'm happy for people to be curious about each other. Whatever floats your boat really. ;)
Of course, courteousness should extend to companies and organisations. It all comes down to presenting your argument based on the facts at hand, openly and honestly. Unfortunately it is very easy to let our own standards slip when the other party is not playing fair. We should not let them get away with that, but we should certainly try to do it in an ethical, open, honest and courteous manor.
Tip of the cap to you sir!! Great post
Thanks Michael. Any time I can make positive contributions to the world, I'm happy to do so.
Well said Alan. The community is now just growing up and reaching adolescence. Mood swings and acne are expected, and a well balanced post like that is welcome.
Very well said. It is sometimes hard to reconcile the fact that our community (and the world in general) needs a good deal more open minded honesty at the same time as it needs a good deal more civility in the expression of that honesty. Having been a part of the ODF/OOXML battles, and trying to engage in something approaching constructive dialog, has reminded me yet again of how easy it is to descend into unthinking support for one side or another. Most issues have multiple sides. There is value to opinions on both sides, but it is hard to remember that constructive criticism is just that, constructive, but that does not make all criticism constructive. Egos (mine included) sometimes get in the way of balance. Posts like this help us to remember to at least try to engage constructively with those both for and against our initial position.
I think it's sometime good to step out of the gray world, and brainstorm and say directly what's bothering you, even if it may sound rude and ignorant.
I posted recently one post on Ed Brill's blog and got only negative responses like: "utter crap", "the most retarted thing", etc... :)
But I stand behind my words, I think Microsoft Visual C++ is a great C/C++ compiler, since it can compile 32 and 64 bit apps, and also Notes C-API code. I had a quick check on Intel C++ compiler (which is supposedly the fastest code generating compiler (without manual optimizations that is)), but it seemed like a dinosaur, too complex, too Intel. GNU C++ will be probably my main compiler in future, but so far under Windows XP the MinGW (Minimal GNU for Windows) was just plain horrible in the generated code performance, it made even slower apps than Visual Basic!
And I also stand behind my words that IBM makes in my impression also dinosaur apps which use too much memory, and are too slow. Just look at OpenOffice, it uses no Java (which Symphony does), it is super small and fast. Actually Microsoft apps are quite dinosaurs too, just as a small correction.
Oh, and IBM uses Microsoft Visual C++ to code apps like Tivoli also (I've seen the crash dialogs :P).
Hi Mika, my post is based around it being ok to "say directly what's bothering you". In my opinion there is nothing wrong with that, the point was about how you say things. I just searched and I think I know which blog post you are mentioning. Did you really think that posting "Let IBM do the hardware, and Microsoft the software, and everyone is happy :) And Lotus, go to Microsoft then." on Ed's blog, a site mainly dedicated to Lotus Software, would not cause some problems? Anyway, like I've said 1000 times, everyone is entitled to their opinion, just don't expect everyone to agree.
Mika -
I think that what Alan is saying is that absolutely, you should come out and say what is bothering you, but HOW you say it matters as well. If you think that Lotus Symphony is a clunky old dinosaur and OpenOffice is an agile leopard in comparison, it is fair to point that out, but it would also be fair to acknowledge where IBM is coming from and going to, and what their intent is. IBM is not perfect. Microsoft is not perfect. Software is not a religion. Given those facts, lets talk among ourselves as reasonable people. Nobody should be telling you your ideas are "utter crap", and I am sorry that happened, but you should be civil in your posts no matter how strongly you feel. I just added a new tagline to my blog (after reading this post), and while I made it up myself, I think it is still worth think about (how is that for an ego?):
Civility in critiquing the ideas of others is no vice. Rudeness in defending your own ideas is no virtue.
- Ben Langhinrichs
@16 & 17: After revising the critics to my personal opinion, I would rephrase the last sentence as:
"Let IBM do the hardware, and Microsoft contribute even more to the OpenSource/Cross-Platform community and parallel of that show us that Windows is not dead yet (the CBM way), and everyone is happy. And Lotus, claim your rights back to lead and decide about the development on Notes/Domino, IBM can still market/own you."
Does that sound better? :)
I was away so missed this post initially but wanted to comment on what a great post it is. Open and frank discussion is always welcome and promotes and develops a community by encouraging people to participate in a community where ideas and viewpoints are welcome. Participants who wish to express their ideas and thoughts should be encouraged to, they may be criticised and people may counter point their ideas and thoughts, but in a constructive, professional and factual manner where everyone learns and its not personal. Anyone who knows me knows that I’ll argue a point to death, but always based on facts and when I’m wrong I’ll be the first to admit that I’m wrong . I have been known to ‘change sides’ and do a reversal when I’ve been proven wrong ( OK after a lot of debate) but once based on fact my chosen course was proven to be the incorrect path , I’ve changed it as there is no point in continuing down the incorrect path to try and ‘save face’.
Potential issues should always be highlighted and discussed so that they can be death with , nothing frustrates me more than people who refuse to recognise issues / risks in case they are perceived as being ‘not on board’ . Those that highlight issues / risks are potentially more interested in seeing the venture succeed and are highlighting issues / risk so that they can be overcome. As Alan say sometimes these issues / risks need to be presented in less negative and derogatory terms, as the method of delivery will elicit the type of response that the opinions receive.
Likewise even if well presented , if a thought is counter to the groups thinking and is poorly received and the individual presenting the opinion is aggressively attacked, they may retreat from offering their opinion to the community, and the community has lost a valuable contributor.
Very eloquently stated Alan,
Thanks Eileen. So how was the trip! Photos please!!!
Alan, I enjoy reading your blog and many others in the Lotus community. I wanted add some thoughts here regarding the Lotus bloggers. It will do my own heart good.
There are several well know bloggers in the Lotus community that I don't read anymore. Even when I see their names in comments, I skip those comments. I can already guess their opinion which is often one sided, and at times disrespectful to others. They don't make a positive contribution to a discussion. I feel like they're seeking personal fame by attaching their name to hot topics, feeling that their opinion matters more than others.
It's also dishearting to learn personal information about these personalities. Some are atheists and teach this to their children with great pride, some have never been out of their backyard and seen true poverty in the world, and some make political statements with no merit or research. I have also skipped Lotusphere sessions by speaker name.
After reading your blog post last month I realized something. I know more about those bloggers than I know my own neighbors. Since then I've invited some to dinner, played 2 rounds of golf with others, and 3 games of tennis.
This post was a gentle reminder for me. I can be a better friend to those near me, and not take business/on-line relationships too seriously.