Comment by sanderjd

3 days ago

I don't understand why you interpret "we should recognize that it's worth paying for optionality and sometimes we decide not to exercise the option and that's normal and fine" as naval gazing. I think it's the opposite, that feeling butt hurt about the projects you work on not shipping is what is naval gazing.

To me all your "I prefer being plain and direct" just sounds like someone who hasn't thought much about why building the wrong thing is not worthless, and why those continuous mistakes in life are worthwhile, and isn't really interested in thinking about things at more than the surface level.

It does seem like you aren't really disagreeing with us here. But you're just saying "don't make me think about why we agree about this!"

3 comments

sanderjd

Reply
dijksterhuis  3 days ago

> It does seem like you aren't really disagreeing with us here.

I'm not.

> But you're just saying "don't make me think about why we agree about this!"

My position is that you're overcomplicating it with business doublespeak.

----

edit

> someone who hasn't thought much about why building the wrong thing is not worthless, and why those continuous mistakes in life are worthwhile, and isn't really interested in thinking about things at more than the surface level.

I have just spent the last two years writing over a thousand pages of very heavy introspective stuff about a bunch of stuff i've done, and things that have happened to me, over the last thirty years.

"surface level" is most definitely not the person you're speaking to.

  • sanderjd  3 days ago

    Yes I understand that. The tendency of engineers to willfully refuse to understand what's going on in their businesses and scoff at the things they are refusing to understand by dismissing them as "overcomplicated" and "business doublespeak" is what my comment that started this thread was about.