🚀 go-pugleaf

Even net.pundits were baffled when szabo@crg5.UUCP (Nick Szabo) wrote:
>Furthermore, the
>emotional communication diverts attention from the technical communication,
>leading to even poorer results.

I don't think that's _necessarily_ true.  Given a purely technical
subject, I would rather hear a talk given by a skilled orator than
one delivered in a monotone -- even if the words were exactly the same.  
In some cases, the emotional communication can help to focus attention
rather than divert it.

>Yes, it may be in the best political interests of certain parties to
>communicate emotions -- especially those like the Pope who make a career
>out of it.  But it is not in the best interests of a group with technical
>objectives.

My question in response is:  how many groups are there with _purely_
technical objectives?  I am inclined to say "very few".  Certainly 
some sort of "political interests" have affected the objectives of
every group I've been affiliated with.  

>I conclude that those organizations that
>waste their engineer's time on emotional communication will go out of 
>business at the hands of those organizations that give their engineers
>tools to enhance their ability to work as a team on technical projects.

I can't agree with this.  In the type of software development I do,
people's reactions to the program are very important -- whether those
reactions are technical (it doesn't help me to do this task) or emotional
(yecch!  it's ugly!).  I'd much rather get that sort of emotional 
feedback during the design phase, rather than from customers...

-- Stewart
-- 
"The old stereotypes must be lost
 that peace and knowledge and love are soft."
			-- Blastmaster KRS-ONE
/*  uunet!sco!stewarte  -or-  stewarte@sco.COM  -or-  Stewart Evans  */