comment on

Abigail-II wrote:

I strongly disagree that you don't understand a problem if you cannot explain it in a few sentences to someone totally unfamiliar with the field, and who has no interest in knowing.

I would completely agree with that statement except for one little point; you appear to imply that I said that. I didn't.

If you read my post again, you'll see that I chose my words most carefully:

...but oftimes, it is often indicative of communication problems.
That programmer was technically correct.
Quite often, if I find that I can't explain something in clear terms ...
If I can't explain something clearly, I probably don't understand it.

As you can see from the above quotes, I was extremely clear not say "all", "any", "none", or nonsense like that.

You said you don't know what my point is, so I will try to be a bit more clear. Considering that jargon can be confusing to those who don't understand it:

Some people prefer to use jargon to discuss an issue.
Those who use jargon often don't know how else to express the issue.
If they don't know how else to express an issue, sometimes they have no understanding of it beyond the jargon.
Therefore, some people who prefer to use jargon have no understanding of an issue beyond the jargon.

While the above is a bit wordy, it's logically valid. Of course, some will call it wishy-washy, which it is because if I only found one person who fit, then my case is proved :) The best I can do is sum it up this way: it's been my personal experience that those who communicate poorly by only using jargon are usually either showing off or they don't truly understand what they're talking about.

That was all I was saying. Nothing more. And as for the programmer I mentioned? He was always complaining about getting bad reviews, even though "he knew more than the customer". He couldn't understand why he wasn't getting promoted. Communication is more than just saying words that are correct.

Cheers,
Ovid

Join the Perlmonks Setiathome Group or just click on the the link and check out our stats.

In reply to Straw men. Re: Re: Second rate programmers... by Ovid
in thread Second rate programmers and my confession by Ovid

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


more useful options
	PerlMonks