I have to say, I find this list extremely condescending. I mean, if it's a parent who is an extrovert, having a hard time understanding their under-age-13 child, sure.
But otherwise, it really sums up to "respect the other person". And the "encourage this relationship" could possibly be made less offensive with "provide support when they want to see that person and respect that relationship".
otherwise, it really sums up to "respect the other person".
I disagree. At least, assuming that people aren't telepathic and don't automatically know what will make someone else feel good or bad and will, occasionally, have to be told so a bit more explicitly. Then, lists like that can be good.
Also, I think people tend to project themselves onto others, and it may not be obvious to them that what they can cope with easily may cause others distress.
Case in point, the interruption thing - if I'm in the middle of something, I'd prefer someone to signal their intention to speak with me, allowing me to disengage from what I'm doing in a controlled manner (e.g. finishing the paragraph I'm working on) than simply butting in, while others seem to have an easier time of multi-tasking/task-switching so it might never occur to them that a question can be disruptive.
A related one, which I probably read on a geek-related web site (possibly the Jargon File), was about signalling your presence and intention to speak to someone rather than immediately saying something; the page said that someone in hack mode might acknowledge the presence briefly (e.g. by raising their hand) but appreciate the ability to finish their train of thought (or at least commit it to paper/text so they can pick it up again later) before they task-switch.
I wish Stella would do that kind of thing more, since it takes me quite a while to task-switch back to what I was doing before.
Heh, that's funny, because there's one guy at FreshBooks who is infamous for hovering -- he just comes by and stands there and you have no choice but to interrupt what you're doing, but he acts as though he didn't interrupt you because you did the interrupting yourself.
Wow, that article really got my back up. Not sure why, just observing the reaction. I know I am an extrovert. I'll think some more about why it annoyed me so much.
numbers 1 & 2 - well duh, I think everyone likes to be treated like this.
3 just seems intelligent regardless of whether you're an ex or int (lazy typing).
...actually, this whole list...I think what's bothering me about the whole thing is that extravertedness (new word?) is being equated with dumb people, or insensitivity.
Just because I'm an extrovert doesn't mean I enjoy six hour meetings or embarrassing people in public *pouts and folds arms*.
Okay, I'm back, now with better articulation of what bugs me about all this - the article only addresses the two EXTREMES of introversion/extraversion. It seems to indicate that introverts never want to be anywhere near other people, ever, and never want to hear anyone say anything, ever, unless it is directly relevant; and that extroverts are like five year olds, always requiring attention.
This was my reaction to it as well -- I actually saw it as parody of a "how to treat someone who's different from you". Answer: with the basic respect all people deserve. :-)
I love this. I found the article you linked to sometime last year and I've sent it to a bunch of people as an explanation of me and the way I am. Many commented that it really did help them understand me a little bit better. While I often come across to many as an extrovert, I think I have just made small changes in order to cope with the majority and the ways of the world.
But otherwise, it really sums up to "respect the other person". And the "encourage this relationship" could possibly be made less offensive with "provide support when they want to see that person and respect that relationship".
I disagree. At least, assuming that people aren't telepathic and don't automatically know what will make someone else feel good or bad and will, occasionally, have to be told so a bit more explicitly. Then, lists like that can be good.
Also, I think people tend to project themselves onto others, and it may not be obvious to them that what they can cope with easily may cause others distress.
Case in point, the interruption thing - if I'm in the middle of something, I'd prefer someone to signal their intention to speak with me, allowing me to disengage from what I'm doing in a controlled manner (e.g. finishing the paragraph I'm working on) than simply butting in, while others seem to have an easier time of multi-tasking/task-switching so it might never occur to them that a question can be disruptive.
A related one, which I probably read on a geek-related web site (possibly the Jargon File), was about signalling your presence and intention to speak to someone rather than immediately saying something; the page said that someone in hack mode might acknowledge the presence briefly (e.g. by raising their hand) but appreciate the ability to finish their train of thought (or at least commit it to paper/text so they can pick it up again later) before they task-switch.
I wish Stella would do that kind of thing more, since it takes me quite a while to task-switch back to what I was doing before.
There's a happy medium, I think.
Edited at 2009-10-01 01:26 am (UTC)
numbers 1 & 2 - well duh, I think everyone likes to be treated like this.
3 just seems intelligent regardless of whether you're an ex or int (lazy typing).
...actually, this whole list...I think what's bothering me about the whole thing is that extravertedness (new word?) is being equated with dumb people, or insensitivity.
Just because I'm an extrovert doesn't mean I enjoy six hour meetings or embarrassing people in public *pouts and folds arms*.
-1 Overrated ;-)