I think a combination of both is optimal. Spend too long communicating exclusively through async text, and silly misunderstandings can waste a lot of time and even grow into features that no one actually wants. Spend too long communicating exclusively through meetings etc, and you end up going round in circles without committing to anything. Alternate between the two modes, and they correct each other.

It's always easier, quicker, clearer to explain things face to face.

This does not mean working out solutions and technical details there and then.

Getting a clear picture of your recipient's understanding is much harder when you have to back-and-forth async. In discussion it's considerably easier to see when a point hasn't landed, ask questions to check for understanding, and dive more deeply into the areas of confusion. It can be a real time-saver.

I’m a full stack developer

My field is tech. Ignoring the humanity of employees does not make an excellent product.

Communicating efficiently does not mean “ignoring the humanity of employees”. These are not exclusive.

You’ll often see “big important emails” by Jobs, Zuckerberg and other figures being circled around. These use written word for a reason. It’s like the difference in podcasts vs books - would you want to study philosophy solely via podcasts? Would be extremely draining. Complex subjects require structure and slow thinking.

Interesting that the OP makes a similar point (“a world of text would feel very lonely”). Why do you feel like going to the other extreme?

I love the eventual video meeting with teammates for planning, discussing company matters or a simple coffee break. But staring at each other during a standup or trying to figure out some product specs or analytics code does nothing to “build rapport” and just wasted everybody’s time.

Complex subjects require both quiet time and noisy time.