On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Olin Lathrop w= rote: > Vitaliy wrote: >> Sometimes the debates become heated, but nobody ever >> gets called a moron. > > Exactly. =A0You don't call the person a moron but comment on the design a= nd > ideas. =A0These can range the spectrum from brilliant to downright stupid, > although the vast majority are usually in the OK to "could use a little > help" range. But saying, "Your design is stupid" is tantamount to saying that the person who designed it is stupid. Inexperienced, unskilled, disorganized, etc, maybe, but the wording one uses does impact meaning. Furthermore, what, exactly, does "Your design is stupid" convey? Absolutely nothing! It's worthless non-constructive, critical, peanut gallery commentary! Why not replace "Your design is stupid" with "I believe you could improve the design by x, y, or z", "Why didn't you implement it with x, y, or z?", or "What happens if you apply the following input..." - open ended questions and comments which help them reach the same conclusion I've already reached. This causes them to go through the thinking process without setting them up to become defensive regarding their work product. Yes, my job is to attack the design and point out its weaknesses, but there are ways to attack the user by attacking the design, and then there are ways to accomplish the same goal (better end-product) without even indirectly attacking the user. Which method puts the recipient in a thoughtful mood, and which puts them in a defensive mood, and which mood is better, overall, for them to move forward with a better design than when they started the discussion with me? -Adam -- = http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist