"Your premise is interesting - and your penchant for insulting tells me you better be a CEO with a bulletproof resume - if you lit into someone like you just did at the places I run, you'd be looking for new work after being escorted out of the building by security."

Which is exactly why I lit into you *here* (not you specifically, you as in a c-level executive) rather than at your office as an employee. Because C-level execs are notoriously thin-skinned about their own failures, *especially* when it comes to mundane things like technical competency, which is what this is about.

  CEO "open conversations" or AMAs are almost never that, because there's still an implication that your job is at stake when speaking to a c-level exec, so *watch what you say.*
The issue here is the technical inability of c-level execs to use remote tools to manage remotely, and to facilitate so-called "bonding" remotely. Group bonding is important and works well for extroverts; people like me do not need nor thrive with human interaction in an office on a daily basis. It saps my energy, not increases it, and I do much poorer work in an office than on my computer, at home, alone doing coding, which is what I was hired to do.

No sir, I said I expect executives to be competent at using remote tools built for remote work well, before complaining about how remote work sucks.

If your report, John, has a spinning icon on his screen when you expect him to answer, you should be able to call John directly on his phone during business hours⦠just as in the old days you could call his desk phone with the expectation he would answer.

Did you make this expectation clear to John? If not, you are the problem, not John.

It sucks because you are not good at it. You were incompetent at being a remote work leader.

Your preference for in person teams is based on your inability to professionally manage teams well remotely. Thatâ(TM)s the point.

They can talk to each other... remotely.

Did you know that even on large teams there's this thing on Slack called a "huddle" whereby you can get a bunch of people together by just pinging them, and then you have a call and everyone can hear each other's voices... and it's called, get this: TALKING to each other. Over a computer. Isn't that nuts?

"Leaving a twinkling spinning icon in the corner of your screen is not a form of communication that will typically result in successful on time project completion. Unless you can remotely read minds." Did your employees have an expectation that they could simply not respond when you were pinging them? Didn't you let your reports know that there was an expectation that, for business purposes, they should be available to chat via voice pretty much any time during business hours, as they are expected to be at their screens during work, and if not, they should be able to answer said chat request on their phone, which integrates with Slack and allows huddles the same way? If you didn't let them know that, or if *you* didn't know that, then you are a bad manager, and as I said above, unprofessional.

Did you know that there's remote-work apps out there that allow for voice communication pretty much at all times? You could request your employees to leave those apps on, with the expectation that if you, the CEO, were to say, "Ellen, what is the status of project X", Ellen would be expected to respond to your request with the same urgency she would if you stood over her shoulder, because she would be expected to have heard you on the app.

Now, as I pointed out above, there's a host of technological items available to you folks in the C-suite that allow you to be dicks and micromanage every aspect of your employees work, and many execs make use of those.

But as you have stated, it is your preferred "preference". In reality you were just bad at using technological tools to do remotely the exact things you want to do in person. There's exceptions... pretty much any job that requires tactile engagement... but for pretty much any job that is purely digital, there's no excuse, except for the incompetence of executives.

So I think here is the crux of the problem... You have taken your preference for "normal" communication, and like many executives, have projected that into what it takes for a modern company to be successful, when I'm pointing out to you that it is your own failings at being adept at other forms of communication which are responsible for the very things you complain about.

This is important.

You say, "I _hated_ having remote reports because it was so hard to engage with them, track project progress, make sure the right things were going on or in some unfortunate cases see if they were doing anything at all."
It was "hard" to engage with them because you were not good at or preferred not to use Slack. But that is *your* preference. You can't track project progress or make sure the right things were going on? This sounds like you need a tutorial on how to use Jira or Asana or Confluence or pretty much anything available by Atlassian which solves many of those issues remotely or internally.

And because you preferred not to use these things, and apparently would rather mange things like this in person, indicates that you were (or are; I'm not sure of your current C-level status, and I don't particularly care) are poor C-level executive. You were, and I'm going to say something here shocking... unprofessional.

Unprofessional! You weren't a bad person for desiring personal communication and then complaining when you are not able to solve relatively simple personnel issues in person when there exist a host of digital tools that allow you to do this. You were worse...unprofessional.

Folks, if you wonder about the gap in expectations and experiences between the average remote worker and the average executive who wants you back in the office, this exchange is EXACLTY why you need to resist.

As for 1, I would argue that you are a poor executive. There are multiple real-world practical
solutions for engaging with remote employees. Did you know that Slack has a feature whereby you can âoepingâ an employee to ask them a question and let them know that you wish to communicate with them?

Did you also know that you can make an expectation of your direct reports that they respond promptly to your âoepingsâ during business hours, especially if they work remotely, and doubly especially if they have a phone that you have required them to install Slack on⦠so that thereâ(TM)s essentially no excuses?

Did you know that multiple communication apps have tools like this to facilitate remote work, and that tools like this are adding functionality to make remote communication better all the time?

If you did not know these things, or are unable to make use of them, or were unable to set remote communication expectations, then yes, you were a piss poor executive.

Furthermore, itâ(TM)s even worse, because CEOs are always on about the importance of returning to work when they did not or will not avail themselves of the technologies available to make remote work WORK. Itâ(TM)s you folks that are the problem, not remote workers.

They did, have, and will, snowflake.

They have been, yes, as have chicks of many races. That's because I'm not a racist, enslaver-defending cracker. I am white, though.

The only thing they will find there these days are more hidden classified documents.

Also, lets back up for a second...

This is the gold stolen by a traitor. Jefferson Davis fled with gold he seized from the state of Virginia, in order to support the defense of a traitorous cause that fought for continuing the perpetual racist bondage of human men, women and children. Fuck him.

And this guy Parada and his cop son formed a business to claim gold they hoped to find like this, named "Finders, Keepers", as though that would allow him to keep the gold that Jefferson Davis stole from the State of Virginia if he found it.

You know who should get that gold? The descendants of slaves of the State of Virginia. THIS is a perfect example of when reparations should be put into place. Not these conspiracy-addled clowns.

So these people are conspiracy theorists.

From the article:

"“The FBI insists they found nothing, but they have gone out of their way not to produce any documents that show that they found nothing,” said Anne Weismann, a lawyer for the Paradas. “The thing about this case is stuff just doesn’t add up.”"

THIS. This is the battle cry of the dumbass ignorant conspiracy theorist. I mean, if they had produced documents that showed they found nothing, these guys would say that those documents were made up, and that the government would need to provide documents showing those documents were not made up, ad infuckinitum, ad fuckingnauseaum.

I will bet you, 100%, that they are Trump voters.

Horseshit.

It worked for D&D because a viable competitor, Paizo, stepped up and said "We will create a true open source license so you don't have to deal with Hasbro anymore". Hasbro realized they meant business, had no way of truly defeating Paizo (or the host of other orgs also offering an open source license), and realized that people were really truly ready to, essentially, play another game other than DnD.

There is no truly viable competitor to Reddit currently, other than Discord, and Reddit is making it hard for people to move there, just like Twitter has banned mentions of Threads.

Reddit will still lose out over time, but it will be a long slow decline.

And this is after he moonlighted as a gypsy gang leader in the 1920's.

The real question, how good of a pink physicist was Barbenheimer?

It's all garbage, everything he said:
""Producing a lot of content with the primary purpose of ranking in search, rather than for people, should be avoided. Sites producing a lot of unhelpful content not intended for people-first may find all of their content less likely to be successful with search," he said."

Then why does literally every search result for a recipe result in pages where the recipe is at the bottom of the page? If I search for Tikka Masala recipes, the pages are so long and full of crap that there's a Jump to Recipe button at the top of the page so you can jump past the crap.
What kind of crap?

how do you make chicken tikka masala?
chicken thighs or breasts
pot or skillet
spices
chili options
what to serve with chicken tikka masala
watch us make this easy chicken tikka masala right here!

All of which have what is maybe nice to know information, but is NOT THE FUCKING RECIPE, which is what I searched for. These recipe pages game the pages not to help people, but to get high search rankings, which requires repeating words at the exact right frequency (like Tikka Masala) to game the rankings. Which is why the recipe is at the bottom of the page, even though that's what I searched for.

Almost all recipe sites are like this now, and the ones that aren't, like the NYT, are able to get by because the NYT ranks highly for other stuff.

Everyone doing SEO as an actual business does not set out to "help people", they set out to rank their pages higher with tricks to make more money.