As someone who dabbled in creative writing before discovering my vocation, I see a lot of problems caused by people not bothering to explain themselves clearly.
As my time in the industry grew I begin to see people who were confused about their own ideas and came to see how many things we don’t even explain to ourselves. Which likely plays a role in how defensive people get about some of their ideas. They hadn’t considered these things and now they feel out of their element.
I'm ashamed that I was completely guilty of this myself.
At some degree of professional development in software, you start to verbalize things, so as to 'explain them to yourself' and it helps clear things up.
This helped me understand that 'writing skills' (in this context) are frankly more matter of being able to organize concepts more than anything else.
A dev who can articulate is literally worth at least 50% more than one who cannot.
And to your point, yes, it's funny and scary when someone can't describe something they ought to be able to.
If someone can't explain something they are actually a risk to the code.
It's organized for them, but not for others. This skill is not intuitive to learn, so it shouldn't be shocking.
The real problem is that for those with authority, it seems to pay off that their disorganization affects other people. It makes others artificially reliant on them, which establishes their position even further, and there’s not really any consequences.
Imo, this is cheating at life and the authority someone gets from being disorganized isn’t real success. Real success comes from having true influence and respect from others due to helping them a lot. This is a lot more difficult though.
Oh well. All the people who rule molehills don’t stop anyone else from achieving real success, so they’re only holding themselves back at the end of the day.
One of the advantages of mentoring people is that you can run User Studies whenever you want. Tell them what the code is for and what you want them to do, and then watch them try to figure it out themselves, see how far they can get before you have to stop the experiment (due to them getting frustrated).
You reminded me of a fun idea that I'll probably never do anything with:
Train an AI which is judged on its ability to quickly teach/train _another_ AI how to do the task. So, optimizing for ability to explain.
It is not to blame anyone, because what people want in reality is answers and answers now - not searching through 20 pages of text, even if it is well written.
My tasks at work are not "read Anna Karenina and think about it". They are more "given X, Y and Z can you produce G and if yes, do so ASAP please".
Which takes us to the meetings and asking around which quite often is quickest way to get correct answer - even if answer is in a "well written down documentation".
Simple text search is not there yet, any advanced system for "knowledge management" fails really quickly in that regard because it takes effort to learn. It is either that setting up such knowledge management system takes too much time or getting used to it takes too much time.
This is why I cringe when I see knowledge management systems posted here on HN, usually these are cute toys but are not really solving anything unless their founders convince 90% of world population to meticulously fill in data in such system.
