|
I was remote for years before the pandemic and basically never used video. In fact, during most calls I pace around like a crazy person. When everyone went remote video calls briefly became a thing, but my experience is the engineering/IT quickly figured out (as I did long before) that audio only is better. I never actually look at people on calls anyways. If I'm not pacing around I'm looking at my notes or working on something else.
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 11:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 21:48 |
|
|
Sometimes the implicit perception is that if you're seen, you're important. And if you spent $250 on streaming gear that you can use for other things, you're worth paying attention to. Sure it's dumb, but this happens at good places to work and it can be a cheap investment in your career.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 12:39
|
|
|
or figure out on your own, by asking your manager, or by asking other remote people at your workplace if "can" and "sometimes" are applicable in your case
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 16:24
|
|
|
I guess I'll be the weird one here and advocate for generally cameras-on for remote collaboration. Not a strict requirement all the time, but generally in favor if there's no good reason not to. I find that being able to see people really helps with the sense of engagement and reading faces and body language for understanding. Talking to a blank screen sucks. Obvious exception for larger meetings that are more presentation-driven with dozens/hundreds of people. I'm very pro-remote and work 99% remote still, but there is some validity to the arguments that in-person work for certain types of collaboration and communication is more effective, and in my experience a culture of video-on by default helps narrow that gap considerably. quote:Sometimes the implicit perception is that if you're seen, you're important. And if you spent $250 on streaming gear that you can use for other things, you're worth paying attention to. Sure it's dumb, but this happens at good places to work and it can be a cheap investment in your career. I agree. Maybe it shouldn't be that way, but the reality is that it is this way. You don't even need to spend $250 on gear, just taking some time to be thoughtful about your setup, lighting, and framing can make you look decent and professional through a laptop camera. I know I appreciate talking to someone that once took 10 minutes to sort out their home office video call situation, compared to looking up someone's nose or poorly lit face, or their dirty laundry in the background. Appearances matter. I try to not judge but it's hard, and I know others are judging me. I know that drives some people crazy and isn't fair and I don't always like it either, but it's true. Guinness fucked around with this message at 17:02 on May 1, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 16:57
|
|
|
I spend a lot on skin care products, so I always turn on my camera
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 17:03
|
|
|
Guinness posted:I guess I'll be the weird one here and advocate for generally cameras-on for remote collaboration. Not a strict requirement all the time, but generally in favor if there's no good reason not to. I find that being able to see people really helps with the sense of engagement and reading faces and body language for understanding. Talking to a blank screen sucks. Obvious exception for larger meetings that are more presentation-driven with dozens/hundreds of people. As someone with pretty horrible social anxiety, this sounds miserable and loses one of the big benefits for me of working from home - not having to constantly worry about how other people are perceiving me. Camera off 100% of the time unless forced, which has only happened for either interviews or talking to HR people.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 17:22
|
|
|
Guinness posted:I'm very pro-remote and work 99% remote still, but there is some validity to the arguments that in-person work for certain types of collaboration and communication is more effective, and in my experience a culture of video-on by default helps narrow that gap considerably. For 1:1 or career-focused meetings, sure, cameras make sense. But for daily meetings like "stand-ups" or technical discussions there's probably a lead doing a screenshare and nobody else needs to be on camera. There's no point to be looking at others since you're focusing on the screen share anyways. ExcessBLarg! fucked around with this message at 18:05 on May 1, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 17:42
|
|
|
I've been trying the get my team to use Tuple for pairing, because it's convenient and defaults to no camera (I'm not even sure at this point if it has camera controls), instead of using zoom which seems to be designed more for business types' face-to-facing. The team tested it and loved it, but "budgets".... The company is saving more that the price of license by not buying snacks for the office, as we are remote since 2020. Give me proper tools instead, you fuckers. e: happy International Workers' Day, fellow information laborers. gbut fucked around with this message at 18:39 on May 1, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 18:36
|
|
|
Honestly the big advantage to no-camera is that I don't feel obliged to constantly focus forwards, which is exhausting when maintained for long stretches.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 18:51
|
|
|
gbut posted:I've been trying the get my team to use Tuple for pairing, because it's convenient and defaults to no camera (I'm not even sure at this point if it has camera controls), instead of using zoom which seems to be designed more for business types' face-to-facing. The team tested it and loved it, but "budgets".... It does have video support, but it used to take up a hilarious amount of CPU so I stopped trying to use it at all. I think it's better now but that part feels a lot jankier than Zoom. I can see how the cost might sting a bit if you have to set up Tuple for a ton of people in your org and then nobody uses it, though.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 18:58
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Honestly the big advantage to no-camera is that I don't feel obliged to constantly focus forwards, which is exhausting when maintained for long stretches. i put my camera on a weirdo stand that makes me in profile
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 19:02
|
|
|
Tuple has a rolling license that charges only for user/months that are actually used, I believe. I wasn't even asking for the whole org (2k+ devs), just for my team of 8. That's $200/month at max. I alone ate more than that in bespoke snacks when I was working from the office.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 19:07
|
|
|
My camera is on, my pants are not, and you're welcome to pick out details in the background but I'm not gonna tidy up for you. Meeting people in person, even a couple times a year, goes a long way for me towards feeling like I'm working with fellow humans. I'm not sure if defaulting to camera-on has a similar effect? Maybe it slows the rate of losing that fellow humans feeling. Like immediately after in-person visit I'm at 10/10 humanity, four months later I'm at 6/10, but with camera-off maybe I'd be at 4/10? There are certainly meetings where a camera feels pointless, but they have near-perfect overlap with the meeting itself feeling pointless. I also think people are too quick to share their screen, and I usually shrink it way down so I can see everyone. Totally agree that talking to a bunch of blank screens sucks when you'd like even the vaguest sense that you're not putting everyone to sleep. TooMuchAbstraction posted:Honestly the big advantage to no-camera is that I don't feel obliged to constantly focus forwards, which is exhausting when maintained for long stretches. What does "focus forwards" mean?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 19:21
|
|
|
pokeyman posted:What does "focus forwards" mean? Look at the camera, try to project a sense that I am paying attention to the person that is currently speaking. I mean, it's not like I'm not paying attention when I look away, but people tend to get the wrong impression. That said, my primary video chat these days is group therapy, so the norms are gonna be a little different. I still find those calls exhausting even if I don't say much.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 19:50
|
|
|
Something that’s helped me tremendously to feel more comfortable with being on video during meetings is to hide my own feed from myself. There’s something extra draining about watching yourself in a video meeting, even if you aren’t focusing on yourself.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 19:56
|
|
|
Cameras are okay for engineers because it's trivial to get botox, veneers, fillers, eyebrow lifts, etc. For people paid less well, they should be optional.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 20:40
|
|
|
luchadornado posted:Sometimes the implicit perception is that if you're seen, you're important. And if you spent $250 on streaming gear that you can use for other things, you're worth paying attention to. Sure it's dumb, but this happens at good places to work and it can be a cheap investment in your career. Depressingly true advice
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 20:41
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Look at the camera, try to project a sense that I am paying attention to the person that is currently speaking. I mean, it's not like I'm not paying attention when I look away, but people tend to get the wrong impression. Ah right on, thanks. Hadn't herd the term before.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 21:16
|
|
|
I tend to have the camera on in team meetings, pretty much always in 1:1s. I like having the channel to nonverbal communication, and being able to joke around with people without it landing like a ton of bricks. Some people tend to leave it off (including me sometimes), and it's no big deal. I also try to keep the camera on with my mic muted during presentations, especially by people who don't present a lot, so that the presenter isn't talking to a wall of silent avatars. The video conferencing app we use only includes people's video feeds in recordings if and when they speak.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 22:18
|
|
|
Amusingly, the "meeting norms" at my work have people turning on their cameras for the giant departmental meetings where somebody is sharing their screen anyway and not turning on their cameras during smaller meetings, where one could actually see people.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 22:25
|
|
|
I feel like video fatigue is a reason to use the camera. It's the same idea as the "stand up" meeting -- if everyone has cameras off half-reading email the meeting lasts forever. If everyone has to be projecting attention at the camera then everyone feels some incentive to wrap things up and they'll speak up and stop someone who's going long instead of zoning out. In giant meetings, I have my camera off but I also often just drop from the meeting when it becomes clear to me that I'm not actually paying attention.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 00:34
|
|
|
I honestly don't care if my team doesn't have their cameras on but the thing that loving murders me is when someone isn't participating at all and has their camera off. I understand you might not have anything to contribute but without knowing that you're actually following the discussion I'm gonna have concerns that you'll understand the outcome of the meeting and that I won't have to go back and repeat the same poo poo over again.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 00:53
|
|
|
Blinkz0rz posted:I honestly don't care if my team doesn't have their cameras on but the thing that loving murders me is when someone isn't participating at all and has their camera off. I understand you might not have anything to contribute but without knowing that you're actually following the discussion I'm gonna have concerns that you'll understand the outcome of the meeting and that I won't have to go back and repeat the same poo poo over again. Just take and distribute minutes.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 03:41
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Look at the camera, try to project a sense that I am paying attention to the person that is currently speaking. I mean, it's not like I'm not paying attention when I look away, but people tend to get the wrong impression. I stand while working and I pace back and forth on camera all the time, whether I'm talking or not, which means not only am I not looking at the camera, I'm going in and out of frame. I've never received any negative feedback about it. Granted, I spend most of my meeting time with team members; we all know each other well at this point. The one situation that occurs regularly where I modify my behavior a bit is a 1:1 with my direct manager, because it's a bit more of a personal conversation. I think that people like us (technical problem solvers) tend to worry a lot about things that we might think could be problems, but aren't actually problems most of the time.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 03:53
|
|
|
Che Delilas posted:I stand while working and I pace back and forth on camera all the time, whether I'm talking or not, which means not only am I not looking at the camera, I'm going in and out of frame. I've never received any negative feedback about it. Granted, I spend most of my meeting time with team members; we all know each other well at this point. The one situation that occurs regularly where I modify my behavior a bit is a 1:1 with my direct manager, because it's a bit more of a personal conversation. I've received direct feedback that just closing my eyes (which I do to help concentrate on what someone is saying) is being read as being dismissive of what [person providing feedback] was saying. Now, I was able to tell that person "I'm just doing that so I can listen to you better", and I do think that in a work context it'd be at least a little different, but it's still very easy to misinterpret body language over video chat. Again, a problem that wouldn't be there if the cameras were off.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 04:00
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Again, a problem that wouldn't be there if the cameras were off. Is this a username/post joke? If you're suggesting that communication would improve with lower bandwidth wouldn't it be even better as chat-only? And then wouldn't that be improved by going email-only? I think it'd work fine to introduce yourself to people and say, ,"I get overwhelmed by visual stimulus, so I often need to close my eyes when I'm having an important conversation. Will that bother you?" And everyone will say "no" and then you're fine. Pre-video chat meetings were frustrating to me because I got no feedback about whether the other person is bored of listening to me or confused or paying attention at all. I'm willing to accommodate people when they don't want to have their camera on (I assume they are naked and smeared with food), but it's always a better meeting when we can see each other.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 04:20
|
|
|
Mniot posted:Is this a username/post joke? If you're suggesting that communication would improve with lower bandwidth wouldn't it be even better as chat-only? And then wouldn't that be improved by going email-only? It's not a joke, and sometimes, yes, we'd be better off switching to a lower-bandwidth format! Not always though, and as noted, there's a certain amount of "people influencing power" that you gain by being visible and visibly engaged. It's just often tiring for me to do long video chats. I've noticed a lot of the people I work with preferring to do voice only, possibly for similar reasons. Possibly just because they're wearing pyjamas or whatever.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 04:39
|
|
|
I sometimes tell teammates "I had three meetings already and now I don't want to talk anymore. We can meet tomorrow." I think that's totally fine! I would do that in-person, too. It sounded to me like you were saying that people would get along better and understand each other more clearly without video.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 04:45
|
|
|
They were literally saying that if cameras were off, closing their eyes could not be misinterpreted as disinterest.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 04:47
|
|
|
Programmer has habits that could be misconstrued as antisocial, on a dead gay comedy forum, news at 11
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 04:49
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:I've received direct feedback that just closing my eyes (which I do to help concentrate on what someone is saying) is being read as being dismissive of what [person providing feedback] was saying. Now, I was able to tell that person "I'm just doing that so I can listen to you better", and I do think that in a work context it'd be at least a little different, but it's still very easy to misinterpret body language over video chat. Ah, that sucks. At least it sounds like you are able to correct misunderstandings, and if you're working with otherwise reasonable people you should be able to set expectations over time.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 15:09
|
|
|
Mniot posted:If you're suggesting that communication would improve with lower bandwidth wouldn't it be even better as chat-only? Mniot posted:And then wouldn't that be improved by going email-only?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 16:05
|
|
|
Was referred by a current employee and had my first interview in 5 years on Friday at a smaller (~30 person product team, maybe 50-60 overall) company that provides a platform for business to buy directly from manufacturers. They are on a fairly modern React/NextJS/Node/GraphQL/Postgres + DynamoDB stack, I'm coming from C# .NET / Angular 12 / MongoDB + MSSQL (don't get me started). Had lunch with the team, talked with the CTO for about 4hr, did a system design whiteboard thing, was asked about salary / when I could start if hired. Heard from my friend that the CTO was super positive about it, but someone on the team bought up the idea if I'd be able to learn quickly since I was coming from an old stack / language. Seriously? Jesus fuckin christ, poo poo drives me insane  Oh well, we will see. I'd initially heard that they usually do the lunch meeting with the team then invite you back for the technical on another day, seemed like I was basically pushed through the entire gauntlet in one day.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 16:53
|
|
|
if you care too hard your prospecting for pipeline isnt good enough 2 interviews lined up: if you fail you're sweating 15 interviews lined up: if you failed one you shrug
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 16:58
|
|
|
leper khan posted:Just take and distribute minutes. I’ll distribute notes on outcomes and action items if I’m running the meeting but I’m not a secretary and it’s not my job to make sure my teammates are paying attention. When we were in-person I could at least tell who wasn’t paying any attention and surface that feedback to their managers. While remote it’s a lot tougher and having the camera on helps just a tiny bit.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 17:00
|
|
|
Blinkz0rz posted:I could at least tell who wasn’t paying any attention and surface that feedback to their managers lmao holy poo poo the post/redtext combo GODDAMMIT, AGNES! YOUR DIRECT REPORT WASNT LISTENING TO MY ANECDOTE ABOUT SEALS! I SAW SEAL! IT WAS CUTE! I DEMAND RESPECT
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 17:11
|
|
|
bob dobbs is dead posted:15 interviews lined up: if you failed one you shrug
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 17:28
|
|
|
Sivart13 posted:counterpoint, if I had 15 interviews lined up I would probably die same, but still I get the sentiment
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 17:32
|
|
|
Sivart13 posted:counterpoint, if I had 15 interviews lined up I would probably die sales sucks, what can i say. and its high touch high dollar sales of the time of a 6, 6.5 figgie peep so it sucks the enterprise way, really
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 17:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 21:48 |
|
|
BlackMK4 posted:Was referred by a current employee and had my first interview in 5 years on Friday at a smaller (~30 person product team, maybe 50-60 overall) company that provides a platform for business to buy directly from manufacturers. They are on a fairly modern React/NextJS/Node/GraphQL/Postgres + DynamoDB stack, I'm coming from C# .NET / Angular 12 / MongoDB + MSSQL (don't get me started). I was rejected from a manager position once because they wanted experience with "modern languages". Apparently I ticked all their soft skills boxes, but the taint of Java on me was too strong.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 17:39
|
|
