15

It's Tuesday, what made you happy last week?

posted
by
Avatar
Servais (il/le)@discuss.tchncs.de
in
Avatar
casualconversation@lemm.ee
37 comments
hidereport
Sort:
HotTopControversialNewOld
You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
Avatar
Lazycog@sopuli.xyz
3 points

100%… I like my boss too, but he doesn’t understand that he is micromanaging me and that things end up taking longer. I don’t think this is a personality issue only. I think it is lack of experience and knowledge about management.

permalink
report
parent
reply
Avatar
Lauchs@lemmy.world
3 points

I don’t know about your organization but I’m a dev in a very large non profit and our managers rise through the dev ranks. Which sort of makes sense but is also kind of bizzare. “You’re good at coding, why not organizing and managing people now?” Especially funny as most of my team are lovely people but social interactions are not my team’s strong suit to put it mildly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
Avatar
Lazycog@sopuli.xyz
2 points

Yeah the workers becoming managers is always a double edged sword in my experience. They understand the work, but there is deep value with management/leadership training (which they often don’t have).

Ha I know exactly what you mean with social interactions not being the team’s strongest suit!

I also work as a dev, but for an academic working group (not software or compsci).

That’s all good, but I just want to do my job and leave work at work. I don’t want to be contacted on my free-time. Academics don’t understand this way of thinking.

permalink
report
parent
reply
Avatar
Lauchs@lemmy.world
2 points

Yeah, the social thing cracks me up as I also work heavily with the events and comms team who are, as you might expect from their unit, fun and gregarious folks who genuinely enjoy each other so it’s a bit of whiplash going from their meetings or social events to ours.

I wonder what proportion of lemmys are devs…

Ha, yeah for a lot of academics I feel their work is their life and they see no reason it shouldn’t be yours too! I hope you’re still able to carve out your own “fuck off n leave me alone” time!

permalink
report
parent
reply
Show more comments

Casual Conversation

!casualconversation@lemm.ee

Create post

Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you’ll make some friends in the process.

RULES (updated 01/22/25)

  1. Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
  2. Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won’t be punished for trying.
  3. Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There’s a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it’s vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a “controversial” message for it to be allowed.
  4. Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
  5. No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a “spammy” message must be applicable to four purple answers before it’s allowed.
  6. Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it “would be a copyright violation if the info was art” as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar’s Number) or less, it’s considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.

Casual conversation communities:

Related discussion-focused communities

Community stats

  • 3.5K

    Monthly active users

  • 707

    Posts

  • 16K

    Comments

Community moderators