"The correctly asked question is half the answer" (c)
I thought, what can I share with the respected habrachitelechami, except for highly specialized knowledge. Probably, many consider it unnecessary to chew on manuals, but for many years now I have been doing just that, answering a ton of questions every day. And I know firsthand what it is like to answer unstated questions :)
Therefore, I considered it possible to describe a few simple rules that I think can help the communicative process.
1. Do not get carried away with jargon. Often, people are embarrassed and timid, communicating with more experienced interlocutors. Someone just keep quiet, and someone begins to pour an abundance of pseudo words, jargon, abbreviations. And the less a person understands and becomes more timid, the more unconscious the stream of consciousness becomes;) Probably, on not too experienced interlocutors, this makes an impression.
')
2. Try to speak simply . Even if you fully understand the question and know the terminology, it does not mean that the interlocutor knows all the same words. In addition, simplicity brings together. Simple and understandable words make it easier to achieve mutual understanding. There is a widespread opinion: if you cannot explain to a junior student how this works, then you yourself do not understand :)
3. Formulate the question completely . It may be that there is no question or the first half of the “question” is not related to the second.
4. Brevity - the sister of talent . Everyone knows, but interpret it differently. Often, for example, "conceal" part of the input data. Probably want to hit in the most interesting moment;)
5. And at the same time, it is not necessary to add unnecessary information that is not relevant to the issue . How often, trying to find out, say, about address translation, the question begins with a complete description of the entire network, including printers and access points;)
6. Try to answer your own question . Is it even possible? For example, people often like to ask rhetorical questions, but wait for very real answers. And even angry if they do not answer :)
Not to be unfounded, I will give a few examples. Forgive me the topic of examples :)
Here is such a magnificence “I attach policies to the link, shape the traffic, randomly drop, but still the link flops.” It’s probably better to replace with something like “The output QoS rule works on the interface. When the queue is overloaded, the packets drop randomly. Could this affect the periodic fall of the channel? "
Or, right here, in the Networkers article: “The network uses high-performance equipment from different manufacturers and efficient protocols are set up that comply with RFCs for ensuring fault tolerance and interoperability. When trying to use modified timeouts, there is a drop in performance of the entire network. Attempts to localize the problem have not led to anything yet. How would you recommend effectively ottrabshut this system? ”There are so many beautiful words that by the end of the phrase you already felt the coolness of the questioner, but alas, forgot the question :). Perhaps it would be better to add the necessary (description of the technologies used) and throw out the pathos. For example, like this: “The network uses switches from different companies. RSTP and LACP protocols are configured between them. We tried to change some parameters of these protocols, but problems arose: the performance dropped dramatically. We have not been able to solve them. Are there any pitfalls in the configuration of these protocols? ”
Or another masterpiece: “What do you advise me to do in my network?” I understand that often the instructor is even cooler than the first teacher for junior schoolchildren and must solve all the problems of the questioner, known and not known :) as if by magic :) And even as it is awkwardly similar put out :)
And I will allow myself to observe: the ability to harmoniously, understandably and simply express my thoughts has not harmed anyone. And often it helped to occupy higher positions only due to the fact that a person can communicate normally with management. Without overloading with excessive “technology”, in which the manager often does not understand, but clearly explaining the problem (perhaps inventing on the go :))
Objections and additions are accepted with pleasure :)
(I will brazenly take advantage of and skimp out the resulting manual for my forum :)))
Sergey Fedorov, teacher of cisco, CCIE Security
Therefore, I considered it possible to describe a few simple rules that I think can help the communicative process.
1. Do not get carried away with jargon. Often, people are embarrassed and timid, communicating with more experienced interlocutors. Someone just keep quiet, and someone begins to pour an abundance of pseudo words, jargon, abbreviations. And the less a person understands and becomes more timid, the more unconscious the stream of consciousness becomes;) Probably, on not too experienced interlocutors, this makes an impression.
')
2. Try to speak simply . Even if you fully understand the question and know the terminology, it does not mean that the interlocutor knows all the same words. In addition, simplicity brings together. Simple and understandable words make it easier to achieve mutual understanding. There is a widespread opinion: if you cannot explain to a junior student how this works, then you yourself do not understand :)
3. Formulate the question completely . It may be that there is no question or the first half of the “question” is not related to the second.
4. Brevity - the sister of talent . Everyone knows, but interpret it differently. Often, for example, "conceal" part of the input data. Probably want to hit in the most interesting moment;)
5. And at the same time, it is not necessary to add unnecessary information that is not relevant to the issue . How often, trying to find out, say, about address translation, the question begins with a complete description of the entire network, including printers and access points;)
6. Try to answer your own question . Is it even possible? For example, people often like to ask rhetorical questions, but wait for very real answers. And even angry if they do not answer :)
Not to be unfounded, I will give a few examples. Forgive me the topic of examples :)
Here is such a magnificence “I attach policies to the link, shape the traffic, randomly drop, but still the link flops.” It’s probably better to replace with something like “The output QoS rule works on the interface. When the queue is overloaded, the packets drop randomly. Could this affect the periodic fall of the channel? "
Or, right here, in the Networkers article: “The network uses high-performance equipment from different manufacturers and efficient protocols are set up that comply with RFCs for ensuring fault tolerance and interoperability. When trying to use modified timeouts, there is a drop in performance of the entire network. Attempts to localize the problem have not led to anything yet. How would you recommend effectively ottrabshut this system? ”There are so many beautiful words that by the end of the phrase you already felt the coolness of the questioner, but alas, forgot the question :). Perhaps it would be better to add the necessary (description of the technologies used) and throw out the pathos. For example, like this: “The network uses switches from different companies. RSTP and LACP protocols are configured between them. We tried to change some parameters of these protocols, but problems arose: the performance dropped dramatically. We have not been able to solve them. Are there any pitfalls in the configuration of these protocols? ”
Or another masterpiece: “What do you advise me to do in my network?” I understand that often the instructor is even cooler than the first teacher for junior schoolchildren and must solve all the problems of the questioner, known and not known :) as if by magic :) And even as it is awkwardly similar put out :)
And I will allow myself to observe: the ability to harmoniously, understandably and simply express my thoughts has not harmed anyone. And often it helped to occupy higher positions only due to the fact that a person can communicate normally with management. Without overloading with excessive “technology”, in which the manager often does not understand, but clearly explaining the problem (perhaps inventing on the go :))
Objections and additions are accepted with pleasure :)
(I will brazenly take advantage of and skimp out the resulting manual for my forum :)))
Sergey Fedorov, teacher of cisco, CCIE Security
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/81046/
All Articles