why is async comm preferred over sync? Since when did people learn how to read?

Because IO is async by nature.

Literally the only actual synchronous communication is when you call local code and the calling code's execution resumes after the called code returned.

Not sure what your second question actually is about.

@Oktokolo Haha. I was a bit cryptic. I'm talking about people, not machines haha. "async communication" is when people try to work things out over a doc or chat messages. And I find it even a bigger waste of time than having meetings

@Oktokolo

Probably meaning async communication as in, communicating through mails, or anything that is not IM/phone based or speaking in person.

I've found that it's a necessary skill when coworkers or you work full remote.

The rest is probably a jab at how many people fail even the most basic checks of reading comprehension.

Because async communication is easier.

The reason? you can prepare yourself.

Nothing's messier than a meeting / telephone call / ... without any preparation...

@IntrusionCM I haven't had the best experience with this. People still take the minimum effort to "prepare" and often forget about it if they can't respond to it right away. Then you are stuck wondering whether you should remind them. Or assume they are working on it.

And every added thread becomes additional context any other reader has to go through. It's a lot of mental effort for everyone involved.

I find it much easier to get everyone together, go through things and then send out a td;lr later.

Then most of the mental effort is on one or two people.

@iceb you described a meeting very well.

:)

@IntrusionCM that's why this platform is great.

We can confirm or learn about people not like us through a rant and without fear haha.

I guess it comes down to a persons learning style/personality.

For me, even if that was the case I can identify it quickly and surely in a meeting because the feedback is immediate.

Otherwise Im left hanging and feeling anxious for a long time

@iceb let me elaborate a bit more.

A meeting is partially asynchronous, as you set a fixed time and give people time to prepare themselves.

What you described is in my opinion more a chat and organisational problem...

Threads are nefarious, even in form of mailing lists.

Imho you will always have idiots who just spam / be as unprecise as possible, that's not preventable

I like asynchronous communication for one on ones, short yes / no voting, anything thats either short or highly specific regarding recipient / content.

For everything else: meetings, documents, scribble boards and a workflow that was premeditated so one doesn't end up with clusterfuck

"async communication" lets me ask for a clarification, then get on with my work instead of actively waiting for the response. just like async methods in your computer.

plus: keep in mind that there are people who just don't _like_ synchronous communication. who would rather eat a bowl of glass shards than to get on the phone with someone.

@iceb for interhuman communication it depends. I prefer async for everything that isn't highly interactive, hard to put in writing or just urgent - and i really mean urgent, not just the firewall literally catching on fire and dripping burning plastic on the floor...

The main benefit of async is that you don't have to be in sync with the communication partner. Someone can send me an email and i will eventually answer it. I don't have to be awake at the same time or interrupt what i am doing.

That non-devs generally ignore major parts of emails sadly is a fact. But you can always repeat messages and finally fall back to synchronous communication if necessary.