In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jenn V. wrote:
>One is a hacker - she does it because she loves it. She isn't paid a hell
>of a lot, but that's because she owns a startup company. She's happy, if
>overworked.
Gee, that sounds somehow familiar :)
>> On a completely different subject, what is a better, non-adversarial way
>> of analyzing a design? The whole "you point out problems and I'll tell
>> you why they're not" thing seems to work pretty well for me...
>
>I tend to get them to explain it to me, and I keep asking questions.
>'how will this work', 'how will that work', 'what if X happens'.
>So long as you give them thinking time and don't frustrate them
>with too many questions too quickly, it seems to work well.
That's a good point. Asking questions is less adversarial than making
statements. So "How does this work?" is better than "This doesn't
work." Which is something I know well enough to parrot, but which my
male co-PHBs keep having to point out to me when I upset someone at
Netizen by saying "this doesn't work."
K.
--
Kirrily 'Skud' Robert - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://netizen.com.au/
The only unnatural sex act is one that you cannot perform.
-- ALFRED KINSEY
************
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
