How we communicate

Overall reception of the guide

• Many see useful reminders about async, written communication, especially for remote work.
• Others find the 30 bullets bloated, repetitive, and poorly structured; some feel the guide itself is not a good example of clear communication.
• A few readers describe it as management-slogan / “values poster”–like or even cultish in tone.

Async vs synchronous communication

• Several commenters strongly favor written, asynchronous communication for:
  • Allowing time to think and self-edit.
  • Creating searchable, persistent records (“as per our meeting” emails, task logs, wikis).
• Others argue face-to-face or quick calls are often faster and clearer, especially for:
  • Complex topics.
  • People uncomfortable writing.
• Multiple people stress that meetings still need written summaries; face-to-face alone leads to frequent misunderstandings.
• Some criticize “ping-pong” chats in any medium and advocate well-formed long-form messages instead.

Language, typing ability, and inclusivity

• One perspective: in large organizations many employees type very slowly and lack strong English, making writing-centered communication unrealistic.
• Counterpoint: adults often find writing easier than speaking in a foreign language; several non-native speakers report communicating better in text.
• Extremely low typing speed and weak computer literacy are seen as real blockers for pure-async setups.

Daily status updates and automation

• Some like automated “what did you do today?” prompts for accountability and surfacing slow progress.
• Others see this as anxiety-inducing, nannying, redundant with project tools, or performative.

Politics-at-work backstory

• Commenters repeatedly reference the company’s prior internal-communication crisis around banning political/societal discussions.
• One side: “no politics in work chat” is reasonable, and the employee exodus was irrational or opportunistic (especially given generous severance).
• Other side: the ban followed complaints about an internal “funny names” list seen as racist; they view it as shutting down legitimate criticism of leadership rather than neutral depoliticization.

Human and social aspects

• Some argue the guide underweights informal, social interaction that builds trust and “lubricates” organizations.
• Others note real-time political or ideological debates, especially in international teams, can be highly disruptive.

Timing, power dynamics, and editing

• Debate over “don’t send messages at bad times”: some say async implies sending anytime; others note power dynamics make off-hours messages implicitly coercive.
• Randomly deleting text is interpreted as a crude way to encourage concise editing; some find the framing narcissistic, others see it as a useful editing exercise.