The fact that this has to be explained to people is why there's a push to return to the office.
That's a load of context that wasn't clear from your original comment. The jargon "refinement" is not used where I work.
> The fact that this has to be explained to people is why there's a push to return to the office.
That you then need to backfill assumed context is not going to be solved by returning to office. That it's now been clarified in text, in a work situation, could be turned into a resource to be referenced in a future conversation. In the office, the explanation would be ephemeral, and may need frequent repetition until somebody overcomes the hurdle of committing it to text.
This is why return to office is an attractive option. People are definitely not bringing veggies to chop or laundry to fold to a conference room. And most of them are going to pay attention to a person in their presence talking to them because of basic social niceties. It solves the problem with much less hassle than actually having to identify and cull people who can't handle WFH.
Here we have your reason for wanting people in the office - you’re an irrational micromanaging bully who’s inflated ego make you think you’re somehow above strangers and are entitled to lecture them about how they are supposed to work
You make evaluations of people without knowing their story. You make assumptions and feel valid in rushing into those assumptions to put someone beneath you
I’m glad people like you are being phased out of many industries now that WFH is here to stay
The fact that having a standard of "pay attention in meetings & don't be a ghost" gets you labelled an "irrational micromanaging bully" is exactly why management pushes for a return to office. It's just way less of a hassle for them than having these sorts of battles.
> evaluations of people without knowing their story.
Pot meet kettle
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email [email protected] and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Your refinements work a little different than mine. In mine, the SME or the person who opened the issue (often the same person) reads the story, gives any extra context, answers questions, etc., we assign a point value, and move on. Refinement can be a discussion -- it doesn't always have to be a research session.
That seems odd to me. I can give my full attention to something I am reading, or to listening to what a person is saying in the meeting, but not both at the same time. If I start looking up documentation, I'm going to miss what is being said.
Can... can most people split their attention this way? Am I weird?
I can do a completely mindless manual task while listening to someone speaking (though I struggle to do something manual while reading) - but this doesn't seem to be what is expected here.