Timeline for How to deal with colleagues who explain things I already know?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 21, 2016 at 8:54 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| May 18, 2016 at 22:33 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackWorkplace/status/733062994746347522 | ||
| May 17, 2016 at 23:02 | comment | added | HorusKol | How does knowing that the Science Museum has a Philips Economic Machine give any indication that you know who Nassim Taleb is or that you know about Black Swan events? In any event, your eye-roll was wrong, and all you had to do was say "oh yeah, I read his book, it was interesting, even though it seemed a little self-serving". | |
| May 17, 2016 at 20:06 | comment | added | anon | Thanks for all the suggestions. It's been an interesting discussion! | |
| May 17, 2016 at 20:01 | comment | added | anon | Maybe I wouldn't necessarily have assumed knowledge of Taleb either, if it had been me bringing it up. But I would have asked, rather than automatically assume no knowledge - particularly with a colleague I know to be generally well read, etc. And I certainly wouldn't have launched straight into an explanation in front of a third party, thereby signaling to the third party those assumptions too. Put all together, it honestly felt rude. Yes, obviously my response was the wrong one. But for my own sanity, I need some response other than 'smile and silently scream'. | |
| May 17, 2016 at 18:43 | answer | added | Kilisi | timeline score: 0 | |
| May 17, 2016 at 16:30 | comment | added | cdkMoose | I think it is a leap to suggest that since you saw the machine in a museum, you must be familiar with the book. I've seen many amazing items in the NYC Museum of Modern Art, that doesn't mean I've read all of the books available which discuss these artists and themes in modern art. | |
| May 17, 2016 at 14:50 | history | edited | anon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 200 characters in body
|
| May 17, 2016 at 14:44 | history | edited | anon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 200 characters in body
|
| May 17, 2016 at 14:26 | comment | added | user8365 | Do you ever feel like joining in the discussion? Did you see that TV show last night? Wasn't it funny? Remember the part about the...? They're sharing with you and not trying to inform you although that's what the literal interpretation might be.Join in the fun once in awhile. | |
| May 17, 2016 at 14:17 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| Oct 21, 2016 at 8:53 | |||||
| May 17, 2016 at 14:02 | comment | added | ColleenV | I think you would be better off trying to change your initial reaction than find a polite way to tell someone to shut up because you aren't interested in what they're saying. Your perception of what folks should assume that you already know isn't reasonable. Give people the benefit of the doubt, and assume they are just trying to share something they found interesting, then put yourself in their shoes and treat them the way you would want to be treated. It's harder than it sounds, but it's worth the effort. | |
| May 17, 2016 at 10:20 | answer | added | teego1967 | timeline score: 6 | |
| May 17, 2016 at 9:33 | comment | added | anon | @Brandin the first situation was fine because it's an obscure topic, and the colleague had no reason to think I had any prior knowledge of economics. The second was irritating because it was about a much more well-known subject, and the colleague now had prior reason to believe I might be aware of the book, but hadn't adjusted their belief about my knowledge. Also, the colleague has no prior reason to believe that they know more about economics than I do. It's the lack of adjustment based on evidence that's irritating. (See also: people explaining after I've given a talk.) | |
| May 17, 2016 at 9:15 | comment | added | Brandin | In your first story about the Phillips Economic Machine, you said that even after the colleague started explaining it "the conversation continued happily". Why weren't you annoyed by the first situation but seem to be annoyed with the others? Are you sure the explaining is the problem? | |
| May 17, 2016 at 6:42 | comment | added | paparazzo | And your college also could have asked if you knew of the book Black Swan before assuming he had to explain it to you. | |
| May 17, 2016 at 3:05 | answer | added | David Hammen | timeline score: 10 | |
| May 17, 2016 at 3:02 | answer | added | Wesley Long | timeline score: 11 | |
| May 16, 2016 at 23:37 | answer | added | Lumberjack | timeline score: 8 | |
| May 16, 2016 at 23:34 | review | First posts | |||
| May 17, 2016 at 7:12 | |||||
| May 16, 2016 at 23:29 | history | asked | anon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |