Ask HN: Do you criticize?

Criticism can be motivated by a desire to communicate useful information and/or motivated by status-seeking/dominance. Criticism that repels even secure people is the kind that appears to have that self-promoting agenda.<p>I like the way Ben Franklin put it in his autobiography:<p>"I wish well-meaning, sensible men would not lessen their power of doing good by a positive, assuming manner, that seldom fails to disgust, tends to create opposition, and to defeat everyone of those purposes for which speech was given to us, to wit, giving or receiving information or pleasure. For, if you would inform, a positive and dogmatical manner in advancing your sentiments may provoke contradiction and prevent a candid attention."<p>He describes how he cultivated "the habit of expressing myself in terms of modest diffidence; never using, when I advanced any thing that may possibly be disputed, the words certainly, undoubtedly, or any others that give the air of positiveness to an opinion; but rather say, I conceive or apprehend a thing to be so and so; it appears to me, or I should think it so or so, for such and such reasons; or I imagine it to be so; or it is so, if I am not mistaken. ... When another asserted something that I thought an error, I deny'd myself the pleasure of contradicting him abruptly, and of showing immediately some absurdity in his proposition; and in answering I began by observing that in certain cases or circumstances his opinion would be right, but in the present case there appear'd or seem'd to me some difference, etc. I soon found the advantage of this change in my manner; the conversations I engag'd in went on more pleasantly. The modest way in which I propos'd my opinions procur'd them a readier reception and less contradiction; I had less mortification when I was found to be in the wrong, and I more easily prevail'd with others to give up their mistakes and join with me when I happened to be in the right."

Criticism is not the problem. How you say it, is.<p>Firstly, recognise that what you're about to hammer on is someone's child. Respect that, and respect the effort that's gone into it. Recognise that it's not perfect, and they will know it's not perfect, but also that it (probably) has merit.<p>Recognise that the person who made this thing is (probably) not an idiot. They are, however, almost certainly not an expert in everything. But neither are you. Your criticism is intended to help.<p>Make an effort to find that which is worth praising. Observe that other aspects need work/attention/deletion, but there will be things that are good. Be genuine in your praise of that which deserves it - there will be something.<p>Express optinions as opinions. "That sucks" is an opinion that is most likely not shared by everyone. "Linked lists can be slow" is a fact, but it's easier to hear that when it's accompanied by "... but fast enough sometimes, and can be replaced by better data structures when necessary."<p>Above all, remember that you are expressing opinions to a person who has feelings, who has invested effort, and who has been brave enough to invite criticism. When it's well intentioned and well expressed, opinions from others are incredibly valuable. When badly expressed, opinions can be of large negative value.<p>Strive to be of positive value.

For some reason, we socialize people today that criticizing people means that you are smarter than them. I've had people pick apart parts of my comments that weren't even germane to the discussion at hand simply because I said something "wrong"<p>This is why most journalists have a one-email rule: you can write and say hello or thanks for the article and get a reply, but very rarely can you continue a conversation past a couple of exchanges. There are simply too many people on the net who like to argue and criticize.<p><i>How do you deal with coworkers doing/saying stupid things</i><p>Learn the four magic words, "Help me to understand..."<p>There are 3 possible conditions. 1) They are mixed up and you are correct, 2) You are mixed up and they are correct, and 3) You are both mixed up. Given equal weighting, 2/3rds of the time you're the person who is mixed up. So when somebody says something that doesn't sound right, ask them to explain it to you. Heck, you might learn something.<p>In that same spirit (humility and learning), you may want to offer some education to somebody who is struggling. But that's only after you listen. Listening gives you the right to talk.<p>To save time on the net, I usually try to restate what I think the other person is saying and then provide the way I understand the situation. "If I understand you correctly, you're saying that large weasels were the first inhabitants of the New World. That's very interesting, because as I understand it, there have been no large weasel fossils found here. Help me to understand. Is there something I might be missing?"<p>Part of the problem with the net is that deep in our minds we view other posters as somehow just part of the machine and not real live humans, whether we acknowledge that or not. So we say things in comments we would never say face-to-face. Programmers are very analytical. When something appears in a program on in a thread that is "incorrect" we must jump in and stomp it out immediately! That little Mr. Spock in all of us turns on and immediately whips up a retort and criticism to show to others just how much more we know.

'I criticise by creation, not by finding fault.' - Michelangelo

There is a difference between criticising something so that it (and other things like it) can be improved, and criticising something as a means of tearing something (or someone) down.<p>Good criticism means saying what is good about something as well as what is bad.

Public criticism is very bad. I once criticized a fellow team member in a fairly loud, emotionally heated public tiff saying stuff like 'If I have to implement that feature that way, I'll quit' (I really did feel like I would have). I was called into the carpet on my manager's office and made very well aware that I had disrupted the team dynamic (because I had surfaced conflict and more importantly <i>other</i> <i>teams</i> <i>had</i> <i>overheard</i> what I had said (which hurts our team's image). Among other things, one of the quieter members of our team expressed concern to our manager (which she had never done ever before). I had to apologize and repair the rift (which took months).

What I've found after many years is this: If you have something negative to say, and don't have any idea what would be better, then just shut up. If you see an ugly flower, do you rip it up and leave nothing in it's place? If something sucks and you don't have any idea how it could be better, keep your mouth shut.<p>If you have a better idea, then tell the person straightforward - I think this could be better like this, that could be better like that, then let the person take what he wants of your suggestions. Don't defend your points, don't argue it. Just give your opinion and leave.<p>If your opinion is strong, and this particular part of the item affects you DIRECTLY, then first of all make it clear that you would like to argue a point, then make sure that the other person understands that this is not personal. Then lay out the points you dislike with suggestions on how they would be better, and then try to come to a middle ground on which items should go your way and which items should go the other way.<p>Keep the primary rule in mind - finding an error and pointing it out does not show you are clever. If the thing you see is not relevant to you and you cannot play any difference in getting it fixed, then don't say anything. Just let it be.

It's not the critic that needs fixing, it's the person who takes criticism to heart, and doesn't learn from it.<p>Criticism is vital feedback IMHO.

While most people's behavior would be net improved by following Carnegie's recipe, I don't think it's optimal. There are cases when you want to criticize something, even if it doesn't make you liked.

Dale Carnegie never used Vista.

Criticism from people I respect tends to have a large impact on me. Criticism that is clearly technically right can make me say "Oops" and correct it. Criticism that is vague and ad hominem gets flushed out the window.<p>Just think of what kind of criticism you <i>want</i> to get and actually impacts you; make that the kind of criticism you deliver. That's if you want to help other people.<p>To the extent you want to help yourself, flattery has always been a favored method.

&#62; it's like a drug<p>I think criticizing is enticing because it gives a feeling of superiority, without the hard work and risk of mistakes... and risk of criticism. Even more insidiously drug-like is that habitual criticizing makes one more reluctant to take those risks oneself, because one is more self-critical, and one expects criticism.<p>"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat." - Theodore Roosevelt

I know exactly what you mean about the habit of criticizing being like a drug. I don't know if I can completely give up criticizing; it may not even be a good idea to do so for reasons that others have mentioned here.<p>But after reading the Carnegie book recently, I am trying to be more tactful. Whether I change my behaviour in the long run or not, I find it is a good social experiment to carry out. Now when I disagree with someone or am tempted to criticize them for some reason, I have to think about it carefully. I don't just blurt out my first thoughts. I have definitely seen that it helps to start with a compliment or merely stating the things that we do agree upon. And then I politely pose the differences as questions, similar to what Ben Franklin suggests. It's too early for me to make any big inferences, but one thing I can say is that it certainly feels better to have pleasant conversations than heated abrupt arguments.

Is criticism a bad thing? If people are posting here <i>just</i> to get their ego stroked then there's no real point to it..<p>If I post something here it would be for it to get torn apart by people experienced in stuff like that. Design decisions are the main area that needs outside help and this is the best place to ask for it IMO.

First thing in your NY resolution would be then not to have a loginid 'critic' :-)

The guidelines of this site contain a useful rule: act as if you were saying something to someone's face. If you're more or less normal, that means that sure, you can criticize things, but you won't be a jerk about it.

Strange when you get that realization isn't it? How could we (and so many others) go so long not realizing that criticism usually has opposite effects? Why do we continue to do so? I still don't know.<p>Don't be hard on yourself that you haven't changed after just 6 days. Making a major change to your personality takes some time. I suggest re-reading the book every once in a while to keep the goal fresh in your thoughts.<p>Also I recommend Erich Fromm's "The Art of Loving" which briefly discusses Carnegie's book and gives more of a "why" than a "how" on dealing with people.

Criticism is extremely valuable. You can't improve without criticism.<p>People who feel like criticism is a personal affront are somewhat foolish. If someone is taking the time to explain you why they think you're wrong about something, you should take the time to consider their opinion. They themselves may be wrong in their criticism, but the intent/result of criticism is to help you improve.<p>I warmly encourage everyone to criticise me at all times.

Situationally dependent.<p>If you ask for my opinion, you're going to generally get pretty direct feedback. Over the years I've managed to find the right balance (mostly) between tactfulness and directness. I don't generally sugar-coat things, nor do I like when people try to "phrase" their criticism TO me.<p>For the last ~11 years I've been working with various startup or turnaround companies. You don't often have time to make sure that everyone leaves every meeting with their feelings and emotions fully intact. But that also doesn't mean that you can or should be a flaming asshole either.<p>I do not believe that my critical assessment of things has ever hurt a relationship that I would have wanted to maintain. I <i>have</i> had situations where the person receiving the criticism was incapable of handling any negative feedback. But in those cases, that individual usually ends up with a stack of imagined enemies and has zero future value to me anyway.

Just practice a softer delivery. Instead of saying "I don't like how this is..." or "This sucks because..." say: "This is good and it would be even better if ...". This way you're not saying anything negative at all, but at the same time voicing the things you believe should be improved.

&#62; "doing/saying stupid things"<p>if you think something is stupid slow down. stop. try and understand the other person's perspective and the root of their concerns.<p>be respectful. i find this easier when i'm in a good mood and my mind is actually being respectful, rather than simply watching what i say. the latter is important, too, because emotions, stress and frustrations cannot always be avoided or ignored.<p>1. their perspective and concerns are likely valid, even if they don't have the background to properly express their concerns or come up with a smart solution.<p>2. no one is stupid, we just have different backgrounds and are in different places of development. sometimes it is appropriate (and useful) to teach or mentor others; other times the group needs to stick to a process that permits communication and specialized expertise.

I find that it's not the criticism that's the problem: it's the presentation.<p>If instead of saying "this dialog box sucks," you say "the user might find it easier to use if you move this button over here" you accomplish the same thing, but with a much less negative impact.

That's a stupid resolution! 5 cents please.<p>Seriously though, I prefer to go Socratic when I disagree on a technical question. I don't want to prove to myself or anyone else that I'm right. I do want to draw someone else into my way of thinking.<p>If my partner in argument manages to answer the questions I thought were subtle and revealing, maybe my understanding was incomplete. In that case, I should have been asking questions all along anyway. Depending on how sarcastic your questions sound at the beginning, you can probably change stance from know-it-all to ignoramus without anyone noticing.<p>If a problem has a settled answer in the public record, send a link. Not everyone considers the same sources authoritative, though.

Personal criticism is harsh and a bit rude.<p>However criticism of code or architecture should be encouraged and seen as a constructive thing as it lets you discuss different approaches and why the current approach was taken and how it can be changed or improved.<p>Criticism and debate in Math, Engineering and Science should be encouraged.<p>Related: <a href="http://micromath.wordpress.com/2008/12/26/women-and-mathematics/" rel="nofollow">http://micromath.wordpress.com/2008/12/26/women-and-mathemat...</a>

I think it's ok to criticize as long as it's constructive.<p>I can't speak for others, but I really appreciate good criticism. I'm talking about the kind that is brutally honest.<p>It still pays to be polite, I don't take shit from people who are rude.<p>I think it's great that Hacker News has the 'Rate my Startup' style threads. One of the things that stands out is the quality and honesty of the criticism, there's always some interesting points brought up.. and everyone here so damn nice too!

It's unfortunate that TdR and others like him are remembered more for their internet comments and less for their contributions. Some of the lamest people I've ever worked with were the ones who were unable to criticize anything and some of the best and most effective people I've ever worked with were also the most critical (and sometimes the most obnoxious) and I've always preferred to work with the latter.

Criticism, if kept in check, can be a valuable tool IMHO. Remember, to many eyes, all bugs are shallow. In a way, then, I think that criticism can provide a way of bug checking designs and modes of thought. Of course, criticism can turn nasty and destructive, but I don't think it <i>has</i> to. That's my 2¢, anyway.

It's worth remembering that Dale Carnegie was a salesperson. Salespeople can afford not to criticize. That's because, when the sales negotiation ends, they will present you with a contract to sign -- a contract that has been written by some of the bluntest, most critical, most paranoid people on Earth: Lawyers. Salespeople get away without criticizing because they outsource the task to lawyers.<p>As an engineer, it pays to have great sales skills, but you have a much harder task than the average salesperson, because ultimately your job is more like the lawyer's. Your <i>raison d'etre</i> is to build things that <i>actually work</i>. In the famous words of Richard Feynman:<p><i>For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.</i><p>And that forces engineers to be critical. The decisions they make in the early parts of a project could make an order-of-magnitude difference in the eventual cost. If they don't find the holes in the plan ("gosh, won't your proposed friends-of-friends search scale as O(N^3) and ultimately bring your social network to its knees?") or properly evaluate the likelihood of rare-but-deadly scenarios ("is it worth a million dollars to guard against the odds that our offsite backup's drive controller will fail just as an earthquake takes out our primary data center, or shall we just buy insurance?") the whole enterprise could fail catastrophically.<p>Perhaps many engineers err on the side of too little Dale Carnegie. But it's telling that many of the great ones don't so much <i>avoid</i> criticism as get really, really good at <i>selling</i> criticism to you. Think of Steve Jobs, one of the most critical people in human history, who gets away with it by playing the role of a fanatically driven artist. Or Torvalds, who is really blunt but turns it into a joke: He makes fun of his own bluntness (he named his DVCS "git" -- look it up in the dictionary!), he's deliberately over the top, and he plays strictly to an audience of engineers, who are more likely to see the humor in lines like "CVS users are ugly and stupid" than the average person is.<p>Try to moderate your criticism, but don't forget that ultimately it is your job. Don't lose focus on it.

My girlfriend at that same resolution last year, I think it lasted a good 48 hours before she started talking in other people's back.

"Exposition, criticism, appreciation, is work for second-rate minds.” -G H Hardy, the opening lines of A Mathematician’s apology

Go to reddit and just fight the trolls. Nobody feels bad about criticizing Mr. "It was an inside job" conspiracy nutbag.

I'm an analyst and strategist, so the answer is yes. Otherwise, I'm not doing my job.

What a dumb question

&#62; How do you deal with coworkers doing/saying stupid things, especially in programming and science?<p>I think the real question you have to answer for yourself is, who died and appointed you the arbiter of stupid? Why do you think you should go around and share your opinion on what other people want to do and say?<p>The fundamental problem is not how you present criticism, as other commentors have suggested. That is a techie "hacks" approach to the issue.<p>It's your attitude towards other people on the whole. You want to critize because of the way it makes you feel, not because you want to help them grow as human beings.<p>I don't know you personally, but a lot of people with the kinds of criticizing problems you describe look at being correct as being righteous, and being incorrect as sinful, unvirtuous and contemptible.<p>Just biting your tongue's not going to solve this underlying view.<p>What you need to cultivate is respect and empathy for everyone's humanity and their complete otherness from you.(And some gentleness for yourself, too.) I'd recommend some vipashyana mediation.<p>Note: I'm aware of the irony. But you asked.