Nice summary, Alex. Some unsolicited piece of advice to add:
Make the less assumptions possible about the person giving you the criticism.
I have found this very useful, because when I least expected it, the person in question was smarter than I initially thought. I have that kind of bias that makes me think that, if you criticize my point, you must have misunderstood it. However, sometimes the one who misunderstands is you (not always, though).
So before going into a discussion on falacies and logic, first make sure that both of you are using the same terms to refer the same things and give the other person the chance to elaborate on their point until it's clear and you feel you can agree/refute it with a proper understanding of what they are trying to say.
👎 "If you use X framework is just because you haven't tried Y yet."
👍 "Have you considered Y instead of X? I feel like that would fit better here."
👎 "That architecture doesn't make it more flexible."
👍 "Could you give me an example of what would be more flexible with that architecture? I can't think of any."
If you manage to leave your ego (and thus your opinions) out of the argument and only provide the reasons behind it, it should make no difference. There might be other reasons that you have overlooked, but then you can pull the "Thanks for providing this perspective to improve my position." move.
👎 "Have you considered Y instead of X? I feel like that would fit better here."
Ego again. An objective argument should be about our reasons, not about us. They might be incomplete, but they should be sound.
👍 "Have you considered Y instead of X? It comes with an API that solves the issue Z for you."
Otherwise, great point here: asking questions to provide indirect criticism is a good way not to look too assertive.
I see why you would want to remove ego, but there's nothing wrong in admitting subjectivity. Unfortunately, it's difficult to be completely objective in every topic one discusses, specially because of biases we are even unaware of, and because not every argument is objective. Sometimes we have opinions that we interpret as facts and sometimes the subject is an inseparable part of the discussed topic.
You may make subjective remarks of opinions (especially positive ones, those are good in a code review and may improve team spirit), but don't confuse them with actual criticism.
Nice summary, Alex. Some unsolicited piece of advice to add:
Make the less assumptions possible about the person giving you the criticism.
I have found this very useful, because when I least expected it, the person in question was smarter than I initially thought. I have that kind of bias that makes me think that, if you criticize my point, you must have misunderstood it. However, sometimes the one who misunderstands is you (not always, though).
So before going into a discussion on falacies and logic, first make sure that both of you are using the same terms to refer the same things and give the other person the chance to elaborate on their point until it's clear and you feel you can agree/refute it with a proper understanding of what they are trying to say.
If you manage to leave your ego (and thus your opinions) out of the argument and only provide the reasons behind it, it should make no difference. There might be other reasons that you have overlooked, but then you can pull the "Thanks for providing this perspective to improve my position." move.
Ego again. An objective argument should be about our reasons, not about us. They might be incomplete, but they should be sound.
Otherwise, great point here: asking questions to provide indirect criticism is a good way not to look too assertive.
I see why you would want to remove ego, but there's nothing wrong in admitting subjectivity. Unfortunately, it's difficult to be completely objective in every topic one discusses, specially because of biases we are even unaware of, and because not every argument is objective. Sometimes we have opinions that we interpret as facts and sometimes the subject is an inseparable part of the discussed topic.
You may make subjective remarks of opinions (especially positive ones, those are good in a code review and may improve team spirit), but don't confuse them with actual criticism.
Yeah, I guess I was thinking of general feedback, more than specifically criticism.