Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by znpy | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

znpy

> I used to bike to work, a productive 2 hours of exercise that kept me very healthy

Just go and bike for two hours around the block and don't bother people fine with wfh.

It's literally something nobody is preventing you from doing (besides yourself).

View on HN

First: you can disagree with someone and not be an asshole about it. Please consider reading the HN guidelines again.

Second: you are dismissing the fact that having an office to go to gave a lot of people a routine as well as forced social interaction. Now, it requires strict discipline to try and enforce it on yourself, whereas before it was a default.

I share this commenter’s experience. That you don’t is fantastic for you, but doesn’t make it any less legitimate.

I just want to point out that reading rudeness in that comment is your own choice, my intent was really a suggestion.

Rudeness here is in the eyes of those who call it that.

You responded to someone describing their experience with an aggressive “just do it and don’t bother people fine with wfh,” implying that the poster was somehow trying to encroach on your ability to WFH. They never said that.

You even express your frustration directly in a sibling comment below.

Pretending your comment wasn’t rude, especially after elsewhere expressing your explicit frustration, is only half-true at best.

Have a nice day. :)

Making up stuff is half true at best too but whatever, have a nice day you too :)

FYI, it also read as excessively dismissive, bordering on aggressive to me. There's plenty of ways to phrase your disagreement without invalidating the person you're talking to quite so much.

"Encroach on your ability to WFH" - you perfectly summed up the reason for the vitriol from remote-only people, IMO:

They are fearful that people with your stance will give companies a better argument for less remote-work. It's one thing when executives talk about it, because they're "not on the ground" and "just want control" or "don't understand individual contributors", but when peers like you support non-100% remote, it's a real worrisome prospect for them.

Sure, but it’s also a worrisome prospect for those that have had serious issues with WFH for a company to decide to go all-remote. Still doesn’t give them the right to be assholes. :)

You assumed they didn't consider they could just do it themselves. The issue is motivation. Going to work helped motivate them do these other things. Biking to work seems less pointless than biking to nowhere because they need to get to work, the exercise is a secondary benefit.

Edit: Recommending they find a coworking space they can bike to and work from could have been a nicer suggestion (assuming pandemic ever goes away)

That was a pretty rude dismissal of a fraction of my experiences during all of this. You might want to reflect on what WFH has done to your social skills.

My social skills are absolutely fine, i can assure you of that.

But I am utterly annoyed with selfish people effectively pulling the whole collectivity back to the office because they can't go bike for two hours or some other dumb reason.

It's okay if you got a bit lazy during the pandemic and no one is denying that... but you don't have to pull all your coworkers to the office, you can just go bike or do some other physical activity it's probably going to get better.

> I am utterly annoyed with selfish people effectively pulling the whole collectivity back to the office

You might want to re-read their comment — there was no call for everyone to go back to the office, and the parent comment is right that you're being antagonizing for no reason.

Here's an analogy for you: I had a childhood I very much enjoyed, where I wasn't on the computer as often and I spent more time in nature. If I were to state this and how much happier I felt, would you start harassing me for trying to drag everyone back to the dark ages and ruining productivity? (No! I can express my own personal opinion and preference, just as you can express yours, and it's not automatically a call for everyone to do the same as me!)

> My social skills are absolutely fine, i can assure you of that.

I'm not so sure.

> But I am utterly annoyed with selfish people effectively pulling the whole collectivity back to the office because they can't go bike for two hours or some other dumb reason.

> ...but you don't have to pull all your coworkers to the office...

You're projecting that on him. He was just saying working at the office was better for him than WFH, he didn't actually advocate forcing anyone back, which was even made reasonably clear when he said:

>>>> Even if my employer began offering office access, I don't think it will ever be the same as what I had before.

Conversely, other people are annoyed with "selfish" people forcing what could otherwise be a productive in-person meeting to now need to include one person dialed in over zoom, perhaps without a video feed. Hope you weren't planning on collaborating using physical media such as whiteboard or post-it notes. Obviously we can do our best to reduce unnecessary meetings, but for those remaining necessary meetings, an in-person meeting is almost always more productive than a zoom meeting in my experience.

This is why both sides are so fired up over remote vs in-person. Your decision to work either remotely or in person has negative consequences for your co-workers either way. WFH folks are mad that they are being asked to commute, in-office folks are mad that they are being forced to use clunky online tools strictly to accommodate their remote-only peers.

> Conversely, other people are annoyed with "selfish" people forcing what could otherwise be a productive in-person meeting to now need to include one person dialed in over zoom, perhaps without a video feed.

That's actually a good point. Conference speakerphones are garbage, so once one needed person is remote, everyone has to dial in. The experience is really only workable if everyone is using a headset.

> in-office folks are mad that they are being forced to use clunky online tools strictly to accommodate their remote-only peers.

This isn't just a side effect of WFH, offshoring/distributed teams force it too. Even before the pandemic, most of my co-located team's meetings were online, since we almost always had to accommodate someone who was based at another site.

To go a little off-topic, there are a lot of good arguments against open office plans, but weirdly the one that seemed hardest for advocates to shrug off was the difficulty of having a bunch of co-located people joining the same call, and having to deal with echo. I think that's because it challenged the assumption that work happened mainly in a very particular co-located way (e.g. like a bunch of people sitting at consoles in a mission control center).

I find it hilarious that people think there is still justification for an expense as large as office real estate / office rent, when the non-biased peer-reviewed studies all show a 15-20% productivity gain from WFH anyway. So what, you want to spend way more to be less productive? Offices are dead. Wouldn't want to be whatever idiot apple exec just commissioned their new campus. Useless real estate. Dollar value of $0.

And that is why you should seek remote only companies if possible. Add in asynchronous work culture. Let the "productive" people waste their time in video meetings.

Asynchronous culture and no-meetings-ever is great if you're a somebody who has the ability/experience/authority to take a high level task and run with it without needing to collaborate with or have input from anyone else, but that's not how most companies work in reality.

If you're waiting for multi-day turnaround times on agreements because there's back and forth where two parties are trying to have a debate over requirements in a document but both only check for updates every few hours, I'd argue you're not being as "productive" as you think.

It's true that many meetings could have been an e-mail, but there are a few crucial meetings that can save days by just getting everyone together in a room for 30 minutes to reach an agreement.

> It's true that many meetings could have been an e-mail, but there are a few crucial meetings that can save days by just getting everyone together in a room for 30 minutes to reach an agreement.

Oh, and what stops you from doing that in an async company? If the meeting is justified, that is. It's the other 98% of meetings that you get rid of.

And incidentally, why "everyone in a room" and not "everyone in a group chat"?

> That was a pretty rude dismissal of a fraction of my experiences during all of this. You might want to reflect on what WFH has done to your social skills.

I agree with you there.

The problem with WFH is that it doesn't force very many "transitions," which turns a lot more things into intentional acts that take more mental energy to initiate. The result it it's a lot easier to slide into a "blah" kind of state without even realizing it, and a lot harder to pull yourself out of one.

I find your take really interesting because everyone who is pro-WFH tells people that they love WFH because of this long list of things that I was doing before the pandemic, and they were free to do as well. I personally find the notion that by merely having a commute, your quality of life is 10x diminished than if you didn't.

If most employers make people return to office, are people just going to drop exercising? Would it not be fair to call that ridiculous?

Stop bullshitting. As a parent the dynamics are totally different especially with Covid measures still in place. My child has not been to pre school for 4 weeks due to sickness and daycare group being closed because of Covid incident. And that must be like the 4th month within this year. It’s hard to maintain any routine in this ever changing emergency.

No you stop bullshitting.

The problem you lament are due to covid, not due to wfh.

And covid it's not an incident, its a f-ing global pandemic.

so what do you suggest, that the person you were replying to just stop the pandemic?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com