Comments on: Bearing in mind that there are many factors of which I am unaware.

By: George Dinwiddie

George Dinwiddie — Fri, 15 Jul 2011 16:32:29 +0000

The CoEvolution Qarterly issue 17 is now available as a PDF eBook, or for online browsing at http://www.wholeearth.com/issue/2017/

By: Ilja Preuß

Ilja Preuß — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 15:02:07 +0000

I always use the Prime Directive when I facilitate a retrospective for a group at the first time. Often enough, there is someone in the group who feels uncomfortable about it. That’s fine with me. In fact, it leads to very valuable discussions. When that happens, the Prime Directive has done a good job, in my opinion.

By: George Dinwiddie’s blog » Project advice from a solo circumnavigator

George Dinwiddie’s blog » Project advice from a solo circumnavigator — Sun, 12 Dec 2010 04:40:59 +0000

[...] don’t achieve that which we desire, or that which we think we’re capable of achieving, we may still be doing our “best” under the circumstances. In fact, how could we not? AKPC_IDS += [...]

By: Tobias Mayer

Tobias Mayer — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 23:04:06 +0000

> I don’t know what that reason is.
Erm, I just wrote about that on my blog. Maybe you didn’t read it. I have read many things in praise of the “prime directive”. Nothing so far has convinced me it is a good way to open a retrospective. It is reasonable, and it is well-intended. There are other ways that may work too.

After over five years of trying to “grok” (Ron Jeffries’ term) the prime directive I still don’t, and I begin to wonder if perhaps there are others too who find this statement makes them uncomfortable. Perhaps someone needs to speak out and challenge it. I chose to do that.

To respond by telling me (again) that I don’t understand isn’t helpful. You may start with “you don’t understand the prime directive in the way I understand it”. That feels like a better opening for dialog.

By: George Dinwiddie

George Dinwiddie — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 21:16:37 +0000

Tobias, I’ve said this before to you. I understand that there is some reason you are going out of your way to denigrate the Prime Directive. I don’t know what that reason is. I know that our discussions on the topic are not productive.

You say that I choose not to hear. I say that I listen, but do not understand. Whey I try to explain the ways in which what you way do not match what I see, you make these accusations again. I think that I do not know how to explain to you. I’m sorry it triggers you to be angry with me.

You have not asked me for advice, so I’m not trying to explain the Prime Directive to you. (It’s Norm Kerth’s, by the way, not mine.)

By: Tobias Mayer

Tobias Mayer — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 20:05:41 +0000

If you talk in terms of people “doing their best” of course the natural opposite is “he could have done better”.

I suggest dropping the term “best” altogether. It has no meaning. In most situations, I didn’t do my best, or my worst, I just did what I did. And I can learn from what I did to guide my future actions. No value judgments. It is a wholly different approach to valuing a person. But I feel that in all our discussions on this you don’t want to hear about other approaches.

I am a voice that says “This [prime directive] hurts me”. And you choose not to hear, but only to tell me I don’t understand. And worse, you cast my objection as a rant.

Are you thus not immediately undermining your own directive?

By: George Dinwiddie's blog

George Dinwiddie's blog — Mon, 07 May 2007 17:33:50 +0000

Dale Emery on the Prime Directive…

Dale Emery wrote a wonderful post about the Prime Directive on the ExtremeProgramming yahoogroup. This blog entry is mostly to prevent me from losing track of Dale’s comments, as is easy to do on a busy mailing list. I want to be able to go bac…