Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> He was responding to what the manager actually said;

And that's what I was responding to. I'm not going to respond to the manager because he's not reading this.

> your advice was that he should have replied to one "correct" interpretation that was not explicit.

No that was not my advice. I gave an example of a response which acknowledges the question, provides an answer "no", and gives the opportunity for the manager to come back with something if they really did have some valid case it might help. All in fewer words flailing about with a bunch of questions that still didn't answer the original.

My example remains valid even if the interpretation of the question and whether it matched the manager's intention was wrong, it still works.

The correctness I'm talking about is not in the answer to the technical question, it is how to go about having a polite interaction with others, which is what the author's stated goal was and what they got wrong.

> In contrast, the manager just seems to be flailing around, unable to clarify. That is not correctable.

I don't know what you mean by "not correctable". Correcting the behavior corrects it.

> Only one of these people was ruining the interaction and thus needed advice.

No, both do, and the manager isn't here, hence my comment.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: