Things I Didn't Learn in 2020(damnoptimist.substack.com)
damnoptimist.substack.com
Things I Didn't Learn in 2020
https://damnoptimist.substack.com/p/8-things-i-didnt-learn-in-2020
80 comments
If it helps - you did the right thing.
My fiancée and I have been extremely cautious, we don’t go anywhere, we order amazon fresh, we work from home, etc.
She had to go into work a few times last week to build her machine (she’s a Mechanical Engineer), she wore a mask at all times, avoided interaction with other people.
Out of an abundance of caution she got a PCR test afterward - it came back positive.
Now we’re wearing masks in the house and she’s staying in her room. She’s asymptomatic thankfully, an initial test for me came back negative but it’s too early to be definitive (and we were with each other prior to her positive test result).
It sucks - the anxiety was already fairly extreme prior to this, but now waiting around to see if I develop symptoms and seeing story after story of random healthy person dying is really upsetting.
False positive probability with PCR is quite low, 0.5% to 2%.
Whatever the stress of social isolation, being isolated apart from your SO while waiting to see if you develop symptoms is 10x times worse. People don’t take it seriously because they just don’t think it’ll happen to them.
My fiancée and I have been extremely cautious, we don’t go anywhere, we order amazon fresh, we work from home, etc.
She had to go into work a few times last week to build her machine (she’s a Mechanical Engineer), she wore a mask at all times, avoided interaction with other people.
Out of an abundance of caution she got a PCR test afterward - it came back positive.
Now we’re wearing masks in the house and she’s staying in her room. She’s asymptomatic thankfully, an initial test for me came back negative but it’s too early to be definitive (and we were with each other prior to her positive test result).
It sucks - the anxiety was already fairly extreme prior to this, but now waiting around to see if I develop symptoms and seeing story after story of random healthy person dying is really upsetting.
False positive probability with PCR is quite low, 0.5% to 2%.
Whatever the stress of social isolation, being isolated apart from your SO while waiting to see if you develop symptoms is 10x times worse. People don’t take it seriously because they just don’t think it’ll happen to them.
Thanks for sharing the story.
Just something interesting you might want to read into. False positives can be much higher than 0.5-4% figures, depending on how you look at it.
Out of the positive results, about 13% [1] and 25% [2] were false. In [2] 400 out of 1570 positives would be false. I have seen as high as 40% being false in other publications.
[1] https://www.aacc.org/science-and-research/scientific-shorts/...
[2] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
Just something interesting you might want to read into. False positives can be much higher than 0.5-4% figures, depending on how you look at it.
Out of the positive results, about 13% [1] and 25% [2] were false. In [2] 400 out of 1570 positives would be false. I have seen as high as 40% being false in other publications.
[1] https://www.aacc.org/science-and-research/scientific-shorts/...
[2] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
Thanks - that’s better than what I’d seen, definitely helps knowing that’s more of a possibility.
Wishing the best for you and your fiancée. It sounds like she’s okay for now and hoping it’s just a quarantine and things will be back to “normal” for you.
Sorry to hear about what you and your fianceé are going through. That really sucks, especially considering that you have both been so careful. Pretty unfair, life.
I hope you both weather it fine. Some people seem to experience almost no symptoms; I hope that is the case here. Maybe she only got hit with a small viral load given how safe she has been... in which case hopefully her body is able to defend and create antibodies. Would be curious to hear how things evolve for you, if you’re willing and able to share.
Good luck.
I hope you both weather it fine. Some people seem to experience almost no symptoms; I hope that is the case here. Maybe she only got hit with a small viral load given how safe she has been... in which case hopefully her body is able to defend and create antibodies. Would be curious to hear how things evolve for you, if you’re willing and able to share.
Good luck.
This has been my experience to the T. Hindsight may provide some reinforcement one way or another, but if we had to do this all over again, I likely would not change much about our quarantine behavior patterns. Our crew just does not want to be a statistic (even if our demographic is of lower risk). Hang in there!
> Especially when, on Facebook or Instagram, we would see close friends without masks hanging out and partying, while we sequestered ourselves from the rest of the world.
People that recklessly and selfishly endanger themselves and others would not remain my close friends.
People that recklessly and selfishly endanger themselves and others would not remain my close friends.
Seriously. Whatever happened to social reinforcement and shaming? If the friends posted videos of themselves drunk driving or hurting animals, people would have no problem replying "Dude, what the hell?? That's fucked up and you're not my friend anymore." But they post themselves horsing around partying, putting themselves and others at risk during a worldwide deadly pandemic? All of a sudden it's not cool to shame people. WTF is that about?
My friends know our household is pretty strict about gatherings. We've maybe had a handful of people over, mostly one at at time, and only when it was totally necessary. My parents knew better than to even mention whatever their crazy Thanksgiving and Christmas plans were--they knew they could count us out because I was very clear with them throughout the year.
Honestly I'm not that torn and none of this weighs heavily on me because I'm not on Facebook or any other social media. I don't get bombarded with pictures of loved ones acting irresponsibly and taking risks with their lives every day, so out of sight, out of mind. My wife on the other hand is on facebook and insta all day and took 2020 much worse. Another example of social media's wonderful redeeming qualities.
My friends know our household is pretty strict about gatherings. We've maybe had a handful of people over, mostly one at at time, and only when it was totally necessary. My parents knew better than to even mention whatever their crazy Thanksgiving and Christmas plans were--they knew they could count us out because I was very clear with them throughout the year.
Honestly I'm not that torn and none of this weighs heavily on me because I'm not on Facebook or any other social media. I don't get bombarded with pictures of loved ones acting irresponsibly and taking risks with their lives every day, so out of sight, out of mind. My wife on the other hand is on facebook and insta all day and took 2020 much worse. Another example of social media's wonderful redeeming qualities.
> All of a sudden it's not cool to shame people. WTF is that about?
I think it's because there are a lot of them proportionally, as responses to the pandemic have been rather divided even within close social groups.
Try shaming party-goers in your friendship circle on, say, social media, and you might find the blowback hard going as "they" in sufficient numbers shame you back for being too cautious or controlling, and you become the pariah. Even if you're confident you're right, you can feel the loss of social capital. And who wants to be known as the sourpuss who tries to ruin other people's happy times?
Maybe feeling like losing social capital is even an illusion, amplified by the way social media distorts social group feelings. It only takes a few people to point the shame back at you to induce a feeling that the larger group sees you that way, whether they do or not, because your other social connections tend not to speak up in your defence.
I think it's because there are a lot of them proportionally, as responses to the pandemic have been rather divided even within close social groups.
Try shaming party-goers in your friendship circle on, say, social media, and you might find the blowback hard going as "they" in sufficient numbers shame you back for being too cautious or controlling, and you become the pariah. Even if you're confident you're right, you can feel the loss of social capital. And who wants to be known as the sourpuss who tries to ruin other people's happy times?
Maybe feeling like losing social capital is even an illusion, amplified by the way social media distorts social group feelings. It only takes a few people to point the shame back at you to induce a feeling that the larger group sees you that way, whether they do or not, because your other social connections tend not to speak up in your defence.
I don't know. I still stick with the drunk driving analogy. Going to a basement rave with 100 others during a deadly pandemic is as unambiguously wrong as drunk driving. If a bunch of friends are going to shame me back for "being a pussy and not drunk driving with them" then they're not my friends. I guess if I were back in my 20s I'd care more about being the pariah and try to find some way of being polite and keeping the relationships. But I'm blessed to be a 45+ old geezer now who has largely stopped worrying about what others think of me.
If one of my gambling buddies tried to convince me to head to a casino with him right now, I'd have no problem saying, "Dude, we've been pals for a while but WTF are you talking about? Use your head, buddy." and I don't think either of us would take it the wrong way.
If one of my gambling buddies tried to convince me to head to a casino with him right now, I'd have no problem saying, "Dude, we've been pals for a while but WTF are you talking about? Use your head, buddy." and I don't think either of us would take it the wrong way.
While I totally agreewith you.. unfortunately I don't think this is as clear cut as drunk driving.
Drunk driving is universally agreed to be a terrible thing to do... Most people even if they have done it, would acknowledge that it was a bad, wreck-less, often youth driven decision.
With COVID the spectrum of agreement on how dangerous it is, is so much more vague. Clearly some people do not believe they're doing anything wrong by attending a maskless party. They may recognize that others think its wrong, but themselves truly believe that we are wrong and this is all dumb.
That's what's so fucked up about this situation. I really don't feel like I could guilt my friends even if I wanted to. Despite really believing they are making the "wrong" decision, I also recognize that they don't share that opinion, and that they are part of a fairly large group that shares their viewpoint. It's not as cut and dry as I wish it was and that's what's so stressful about it.
Drunk driving is universally agreed to be a terrible thing to do... Most people even if they have done it, would acknowledge that it was a bad, wreck-less, often youth driven decision.
With COVID the spectrum of agreement on how dangerous it is, is so much more vague. Clearly some people do not believe they're doing anything wrong by attending a maskless party. They may recognize that others think its wrong, but themselves truly believe that we are wrong and this is all dumb.
That's what's so fucked up about this situation. I really don't feel like I could guilt my friends even if I wanted to. Despite really believing they are making the "wrong" decision, I also recognize that they don't share that opinion, and that they are part of a fairly large group that shares their viewpoint. It's not as cut and dry as I wish it was and that's what's so stressful about it.
> With COVID the spectrum of agreement on how dangerous it is, is so much more vague.
Yes, I think this is exactly why we struggle with tamping down on COVID spread. While many commenting in this thread understand how the drunk driving analogy holds (probabilistic, dangerous to others besides yourself) COVID is new enough and communication hasn’t been strong enough for the message to percolate through society.
Yes, I think this is exactly why we struggle with tamping down on COVID spread. While many commenting in this thread understand how the drunk driving analogy holds (probabilistic, dangerous to others besides yourself) COVID is new enough and communication hasn’t been strong enough for the message to percolate through society.
[deleted]
"Frequently changing advice from the same public health institutions (remember when the WHO advised against wearing masks?)"
One thing that really caught my attention is how reddit went from 'if you wear masks you are overreacting and a bad person' to 'if you don't wear masks you are killing people and a bad person' in a heartbeat.
I'm not advocating not wearing masks or anything, I was just surprised how the definition of what was the "obviously" right thing to do changed in a heartbeat without any concern on how diagonally opposite these two advices were.
When such opposite advices are given by the same institution I think some skepticism is really useful. (Did they know the previous advice was wrong in which case they lied? Did they not know any better but gave advice anyway? What was the compelling evidence to change their minds?). Again, I think you should wear masks, but the total lack of questioning and the instantaneous change of opinion I saw online was really weird.
One thing that really caught my attention is how reddit went from 'if you wear masks you are overreacting and a bad person' to 'if you don't wear masks you are killing people and a bad person' in a heartbeat.
I'm not advocating not wearing masks or anything, I was just surprised how the definition of what was the "obviously" right thing to do changed in a heartbeat without any concern on how diagonally opposite these two advices were.
When such opposite advices are given by the same institution I think some skepticism is really useful. (Did they know the previous advice was wrong in which case they lied? Did they not know any better but gave advice anyway? What was the compelling evidence to change their minds?). Again, I think you should wear masks, but the total lack of questioning and the instantaneous change of opinion I saw online was really weird.
What's weird to me is how freaked out people are about this. I get that it is a higher risk than a lightening strike, but given that the absolute number of deaths in 2020 was lower than 2019 (even given that deaths of despair were up significantly), I'm thinking our society has turned into a bunch of nervous nellies. Or maybe city folk don't think they should ever get to die.
In any case, the scared worried self-isolating comments I have read in this thread from "man-folk" make me think that when we got rid of TB and SPox and Polion - we probably got rid of Testosterone at the same time.
In any case, the scared worried self-isolating comments I have read in this thread from "man-folk" make me think that when we got rid of TB and SPox and Polion - we probably got rid of Testosterone at the same time.
for me it was always clear that masks were effective, but institutions were trying to accumulate enough for health workers by flat out lying to the public. maybe they shouldn’t have lied so blatantly, but it doesn’t make me skeptical about the effectiveness of masks itself.
My impression was that during the early stages there was more concern about touch based transmission, so there was a feeling that the benefits of masks (trapping respiratory droplets) might be outweighed by causing people to touch their faces more frequently.
Let’s say we take it “some skepticism” is useful. The question is - how do you use this skepticism to enable quick decision making?
Maybe quick decision making _is_ what being sceptical is for?
Way too many times leaders and people wanted quick decisions in 2020 when what scepticism may help us do is slow us down to be more thoughtful, critical and careful.
Way too many times leaders and people wanted quick decisions in 2020 when what scepticism may help us do is slow us down to be more thoughtful, critical and careful.
I think it is totally reasonable to not be cool calm and collected during a pandemic. It was an incredibly stressfull experience which means it is excusable to be not collected anyway. I would argue that it is also okay to not be happy during the pandemic because your emotions are a useful barometer for the state of your world. If your world is dangerous, then it is reasonable to be stressed and under a higher alert status than normal. It seems unreasonable to maintain coolness and calm when the situation calls for further action.
Thank you for sharing.
My guess for #8 - The dog wants you to put on your shoes and take him for a walk.
My guess for #8 - The dog wants you to put on your shoes and take him for a walk.
Point number 7 is one that I am still learning. I'm at my girlfriend's parent's for lunch and here I am, casually browsing HN with a termux session in the background.
He seemed to have removed the page. Here is the backup:
https://web.archive.org/web/20210102002234/https://ex-apple-...
Just logged in to say, the author of this article is dubious. I have spoken.
[deleted]
I have yet to use zoom . I hope it stays that way.
I have no issue speaking up when other people’s children are being disruptive during a Zoom meeting.
If they can walk, they can learn social protocol.
If they can walk, they can learn social protocol.
The delicious irony here is that social protocol asks adults in a mandatory remote meeting to not scold other people's children during an already trying moment.
I did not say scold. Also, this is prior to COVID.
> If they can walk, they can learn social protocol.
Kids can generally walk aged one. I think that’s too young to learn social protocol.
Kids can generally walk aged one. I think that’s too young to learn social protocol.
As a parent of a young child, this was my immediate thought. There is zero linkage between the ability to walk and the ability to relate socially. They are completely different skillets that develop along completely different timelines. This is the statement of someone who knows nothing of childhood development. But yes, people should endeavor to keep their kids off the zoom.
As a parent of a walking 18mo, a) it depends, sometimes it takes closer to age two, and b) they're absolutely too young to learn any social protocol at this age.
My 23mo has learned social protocol to get what he wants and when to violate it to get it even more quickly when I have no other options than to comply. But I'm not sure that any given Zoom meeting is important enough to mess up my son's breeding.
I also start to see a similar pattern in mine. At this point, she's figuring out barter. She'll approach me with some thing that belongs to me (or occasionally with something entirely random) that she picked up somewhere when I wasn't looking, expecting that I'll give her something she wants in return (especially things we don't let her play with, like a smartphone). She doesn't understand the concept of relative value yet, as evidenced by trying to exchange a scrap of paper for my glasses today.
> But I'm not sure that any given Zoom meeting is important enough to mess up my son's breeding.
Agreed. I'm lucky to be working in a place where my superiors all have kids, so this is implicitly understood.
> But I'm not sure that any given Zoom meeting is important enough to mess up my son's breeding.
Agreed. I'm lucky to be working in a place where my superiors all have kids, so this is implicitly understood.
Honestly it took our 4 year old months to accept that a closed office door meant she wasn't allowed in. What does OP expect parents to do when their kid needs them? Beat them? Lock the door and ignore the crying? Jeez.
> If they can walk, they can learn social protocol.
At the beginning of a conference talk a couple years ago, my 2.5-year-old demonstrated his ability to "learn social protocol".
2 minutes into the talk, he shouted "Don't talk in the lecture!" (and was promptly removed by one parent to the hallway).
At the beginning of a conference talk a couple years ago, my 2.5-year-old demonstrated his ability to "learn social protocol".
2 minutes into the talk, he shouted "Don't talk in the lecture!" (and was promptly removed by one parent to the hallway).
While I don't necessarily disagree, I just don't know any child "developed" enough to comprehend what you are talking about. That's usually between 11-13 months. Try explaining the notion of "working from home" and "zoom conference" and daddy talking to a man in the box to a one year old.
LOL. The man in the box is so strange when you think about it that way.
It is as simple as making a stern face versus smiling and waiving (which I believe encourages the behavior).
Let me guess, you have no children of your own, right?
Anecdotally, I disagree. I have never seen any parent successfully stop a 1-year-old child from doing something by any kind of face.
Not to mention if it's from a face on the computer screen.
Instead, just tell the parent to put the child in a different room.
Not to mention if it's from a face on the computer screen.
Instead, just tell the parent to put the child in a different room.
Even that is usually not an option. You can’t put a 1-2 year old in a room by themselves for a meeting
This has got the be one of the most delusional things I’ve read here
Stern face is going to make them burst into tears. Great strategy during a business call.
Am-I the only person that thinks kids derailing a meeting is funny?
Depends on the importance of the meeting and the status of the person who is responsible.
If you live in a corporate environment where status matters, your kids should better not detail a meeting where you are the person with a low status compared to the other participants. If status doesn't matter in your corporate culture you just have to be aware of the importance of the meeting. If you company is fighting for survival it is probably not funny to derail the discussion.
However, there are many unimportant meetings with people with the same status and I agree that if it doesn't become a pattern it can be a sweet/nice/funny distraction ;-)
If you live in a corporate environment where status matters, your kids should better not detail a meeting where you are the person with a low status compared to the other participants. If status doesn't matter in your corporate culture you just have to be aware of the importance of the meeting. If you company is fighting for survival it is probably not funny to derail the discussion.
However, there are many unimportant meetings with people with the same status and I agree that if it doesn't become a pattern it can be a sweet/nice/funny distraction ;-)
I can definitely see how it would be annoying in the moment, but if your company is in a fight for survival and a kid wasting 15 of your minutes is an actual risk to that fight, there are probably deeper viability questions.
imo the folks involved in a company fighting for survival during a pandemic are the exact crowd that need some sweet and funny distractions here and there.
What's much less funny is the classical neighbour with a drill doing renovation in the middle of your job interview on Zoom.
Every once in awhile, sure, no biggie, definitely funny. But it's also already hard to keep meetings on topic and an efficient use of everyone's time. Anything that makes that harder is not ideal.
Kids derailing people's meetings are funny as long as you aren't party to it. Just like people getting splashed by a passing car on a rainy day is funny, as long as you aren't party to it.
Side question? Do you actually use the camera when doing a Zoom (or other) meeting?
Most of us don't where I work. Not only we don't necessarily look our best, and neither do our rooms, but most of the times the screen is used for other purposes. Usually screen sharing, a powerpoint persentation, or some work document.
Most of us don't where I work. Not only we don't necessarily look our best, and neither do our rooms, but most of the times the screen is used for other purposes. Usually screen sharing, a powerpoint persentation, or some work document.
Yes we all turn our cameras on in meetings, I believe body language is important. Can’t imagine working in an office without seeing the people you work with in some cadence
We also turn our cameras on - though I wish we didn't. There's no point. Between varying (often low) video quality and the lag between audio and video (and software recognizing it's time to switch the main screen), having all our faces on the screen is worthless, IMO. It only serves to make everyone self-conscious. And in many cases someone sharing their screen, at which point nobody is looking at the tiny faces in the corner anyway.
We mostly default to on but no one has an issue when people turn cameras off and they're pretty much off if there's a presentation anyway. Seems to work pretty well. Really, nothing pandemic related, we're spread across about a third of the world (or more, for some meetings) anyway.
A lot of people have fairly managed video setups at this point although not all do.
A lot of people have fairly managed video setups at this point although not all do.
Meh I don’t find the varying quality and field of view and lighting really makes it useful at all for body language. We usually have a big screen share as the main focus so the little talking heads are more of a distraction
Yep I'd hate this no-video culture. Having said that, in bigger meetings, I usually turn it off.
At my work we always have the camera on unless it’s a large meeting (30+).
My boss tried to mandate cameras during video calls. I really don't want to look at my coworkers. I turned my camera on once and it looked like garbage and that was enough for me.
I always just pin whatever screen is being shared to be full screen so I don't have to look at anyone.
I always just pin whatever screen is being shared to be full screen so I don't have to look at anyone.
I do. I suspect people vary wildly by how often they do meetings and what they use them for. For me, most conversations are done in text, and most video meetings are regularly scheduled and 15 minutes long.
Having a webcam on for longer meetings is tiring, because I feel less free to change my position and move around. But it's okay for a short meeting. I make sure I look reasonable beforehand.
Having a webcam on for longer meetings is tiring, because I feel less free to change my position and move around. But it's okay for a short meeting. I make sure I look reasonable beforehand.
Yes. While zoom sucks for conveying body-language, being able to see someone’s unhappy, confused, or confidently-agreeing face makes certain kinds of meetings much easier.
I run an agency and I mandate no cameras, even on client facing calls. It's always a distraction, just focus on screen sharing an agenda and the data.
I'd have no issue telling you to mind your own if you tried telling me how to manage my kids.
I think the issue here is the general expectation that you should not be managing your kids during work time, including video meetings during work-from-home. You can be minding the kids, you can be working, you can't do both at the same time.
The "social protocol" expects that if all adults in the household are working then childcare services are a must-have; but as lifestyles and services are disrupted for Covid-related resons, this is becoming unworkable for a large number of families.
The "social protocol" expects that if all adults in the household are working then childcare services are a must-have; but as lifestyles and services are disrupted for Covid-related resons, this is becoming unworkable for a large number of families.
Why are people so up their own ass about receiving advice and aide with their kids?
Do you get hostile and reject people helping you with flat tire, when you're lost, chasing down you escaped dog?
Do you jump to the conclusion that the offer is indictment of you're parenting?
Do you get hostile and reject people helping you with flat tire, when you're lost, chasing down you escaped dog?
Do you jump to the conclusion that the offer is indictment of you're parenting?
Simple. The only people who try to help are people who don’t have children. Everyone is the perfect parent until they have their own children. Then they know to not speak as they understand that children are different and what worked for their kids may not work for others.
If you were at a gas station washing your car windows, you'd probably be annoyed if some guy drove up and started giving unsolicited judgmental advice about your tires.
If you were at the park playing fetch with your dog, you'd probably be annoyed if someone started giving you unsolicited judgmental advice about dog grooming.
If you were at the park playing fetch with your dog, you'd probably be annoyed if someone started giving you unsolicited judgmental advice about dog grooming.
Would you like it if I saw some code you were writing over your shoulder and I started correcting you and giving you advice on how you should be coding it differently? Maybe, but more likely you would feel defensive depending on my tone and/or how you interpreted my tone.
There's a whole paradigm that centers around exactly this. It is called pair programming. It is quite popular.
Indeed, and believe it or not, it is quite popular for 2 people to co-operatively raise kids as well. It's called "parenting".
Sarcasm aside, I think the main difference between pair programming and OP's scenario is that usually it's unsolicited advice that is unwelcome. Pair programming is usually consensual.
Sarcasm aside, I think the main difference between pair programming and OP's scenario is that usually it's unsolicited advice that is unwelcome. Pair programming is usually consensual.
You can’t provide advice until you have a full picture of the situation.
Did it ever occur to you that we are evading their (kids) space when working from home, not the other way around? It's that you have to learn the protocol, not them.
This is exactly my thoughts. I'm still without children, and over the years I made my own little "cave" from where I can work, although my flat isn't exactly huge.
Some colleagues are not so lucky. Multiple young children, small flats, day-to-day logistics complications, significant others that are essential workers (as my wife, who is working extra shifts since this pandemonium started, and I don't have an idea what would I do if we had a child) or could not work from home... And same goes for business partners or clients. I don't even dare scrutinize them about what they are going through these days. Some of their loved ones may be impacted, or they are having a hard time by themselves, the least they need is me judging them because they have a needy kid.
I remember a couple of years ago I had an interview with a job candidate, online because some other circumstances (FYI he was hired and is a great chap). He was pretty anxious, I can hear and see that, and in the middle of the interview his six-month baby started crying. We could hear the wife trying to calm the baby down and seen him sweating peas. My senior colleague did the best thing at that moment, basically aborting the interview discussion altogether and started talking about children and parenting and so on. We offered the guy to take a break, but the baby calmed down soon enough, so we continued. I remember the relief I've seen when he realized we understand him and that we're on the same page. He became much more relaxed in the rest of the interview.
Some colleagues are not so lucky. Multiple young children, small flats, day-to-day logistics complications, significant others that are essential workers (as my wife, who is working extra shifts since this pandemonium started, and I don't have an idea what would I do if we had a child) or could not work from home... And same goes for business partners or clients. I don't even dare scrutinize them about what they are going through these days. Some of their loved ones may be impacted, or they are having a hard time by themselves, the least they need is me judging them because they have a needy kid.
I remember a couple of years ago I had an interview with a job candidate, online because some other circumstances (FYI he was hired and is a great chap). He was pretty anxious, I can hear and see that, and in the middle of the interview his six-month baby started crying. We could hear the wife trying to calm the baby down and seen him sweating peas. My senior colleague did the best thing at that moment, basically aborting the interview discussion altogether and started talking about children and parenting and so on. We offered the guy to take a break, but the baby calmed down soon enough, so we continued. I remember the relief I've seen when he realized we understand him and that we're on the same page. He became much more relaxed in the rest of the interview.
[deleted]
[deleted]
This part really resonated. What a weird year it's been. Finding the right balance between having a social life and being safe + conscientious has proven to be exhausting and depressing.
My wife and I have chosen to be super safe and turn down almost all social engagements, even ones with close family who promised to wear masks and social distance. If it wasn't a life or death thing, we felt the "right" thing to do was to host the even on Zoom, or not at all.
That decision never came lightly though and missing events with friends and family always weighed on us heavily. We'd never know if we were doing the right thing or if we were being too cautious. Especially when, on Facebook or Instagram, we would see close friends without masks hanging out and partying, while we sequestered ourselves from the rest of the world.
It's hard not to have emotions in a situation like that. At times I have felt frustrated, angry, tired, etc. Everyone has a different perspective on this whole thing, a different feeling of risk, and a difference decision about how to behave during it all. I long for the day when we can be human again without having to pass every social decision through some matrix of risk calculation.