It seems somewhat unfortunate to distil this down to where there are only two possible interpretations of someones idea, right and wrong. I don't think you could have straw manned his point any more either.

The entire idea of "can do vs can't do" is such a platitude anyways, it's not even remotely interesting. It takes all nuance away from communication. As if just because someone has to make their position clearer than a statement like "yes, if" in order to manage the expectations of others that they just don't have a "can do" attitude and by implication are destined to fail.

How is "no, unless" clearer than a statement like "yes, if?"

I think the entire point is that they say the same thing while projecting a completely different attitude.

The way that someone responds to the question of "can we do this" is very important.

Because there's plenty of people that don't listen past the first word.

Why is that only a problem if you start a sentence with 'Yes' ?

Cynics always have scapegoats. It's always everyone else's fault. Dumb colleagues, idiotic managers, stupid customers. Just remember you control your situation and how those around you interact with you.

The 'Yes, if' thing is one of the major reasons I love startups.

Because they want to hear yes. So, they will keep looking for it even if you start with no.

So start with "If..." and finish with "...then yes!"

This is my favorite comment in the thread :)

That... sounds like it might actually work.

Then there are MUCH bigger problems than the first word anyways.

This kind of reply has become such a meme. Of course, it's always some "bigger" problem that are at the heart of disfunction. The problem is the _people_ who are often at the heart of such disfunction are usually the ones that judge their "reports" by how often they say "no, because" vs. "yes, if", typically because of some quote they read paraphrased in some internet discussion.

We typically call this middle management.

Regardless I'm not really interested in the blame game on who's responsible management or engineering. Both are irrelevant to this discussion. "Can" or "can't", as the article discusses, is an issue of leadership in a business. If it isn't there, it isn't going to matter whether the engineer says "how high?" whenever their asked to jump.

Neither is really, which is why this is such an empty discussion.

I disagree; as long as we're generalizing about how "Hacker News" any one comment is, let's call yours the perfect HN comment: Bikeshedding (as if the world is black and white, no less) about who is the most wrong in a discussion. The commenter above you was at least still on the point, made an attempt at an alternate solution, and still left reasonable room for shades of gray.

The only thing that could top your comment is mine; now we're two meta levels deep, not even discussing the original article anymore.

One person's cynical pessimism is another person's realism borne from 20+ years of professional experience.

I prefer "yes, if" but reality says that the "ifs" will never be made part of the planning and then blame will come back to you because you said "yes"

I find it similar to the "estimates" of when we'll finish something, that get turned into hard delivery deadlines once the project scribe commits them to the first draft of the project plan.