SShortSingh.
Back to feed

Why Walking Back Feedback After a Flinch Does More Harm Than Good

0
·1 views

Retracting constructive feedback the moment someone reacts negatively leaves them confused and worse off than if nothing had been said at all. The act of softening criticism under pressure is driven by the speaker's own discomfort, not genuine consideration for the other person. Experts suggest letting silence sit after delivering a note, then repeating the specific point calmly and concisely rather than apologising repeatedly. Asking the recipient for their reaction and linking feedback to a concrete next step makes the message more useful and actionable. One key exception applies: if someone is genuinely distressed, pause the feedback entirely and address their emotional state first, returning to the conversation later.

Read the full story at DEV Community

This is an AI-generated summary. ShortSingh links to the original source for the complete article.

Discussion (0)

Log in to join the discussion and vote.

Log in

Related stories

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Practical Guide to LLM Observability Tools Tailored for Small Dev Teams

A technical guide published on DEV Community outlines how small teams and startups can monitor large language model deployments in production without enterprise-level budgets. The guide highlights that standard APM tools like Datadog and New Relic are insufficient for LLM-specific failure modes such as hallucinations, prompt injections, and unpredictable token costs. Key capabilities recommended include request logging, latency and token tracking, prompt versioning, semantic evaluation, and PII redaction. The guide reviews tools including LangSmith, Arize AI, Weights and Biases, and PromptLayer, assessing each for small-team suitability and ease of onboarding. It argues that even minimal-scale LLM deployments require a dedicated observability layer to maintain output quality and cost control.

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

60% of CoinMarketCap's Tokenised Real-World Assets Have No Tracked Market

A developer analysing CoinMarketCap's real-world asset (RWA) API found that 476 of 791 underlying assets flagged as 'has_tokens: true' have no wrapper with a CMC-tracked market, representing 60.2% of the flagged pool. The finding emerged from a small open-source tool called Shelfware, built using Python's standard library and querying CoinMarketCap's RWA and cryptocurrency endpoints. The core issue is a definitional mismatch: the 'has_tokens' boolean confirms a token has been minted, but does not indicate whether CoinMarketCap actively tracks a market for it. CoinMarketCap classifies such listings as 'untracked', meaning they are registered but do not yet meet the platform's methodology requirements for market tracking. The developer noted that most price-based RWA tools silently drop null-price rows, effectively hiding the scale of this gap.

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

ServiceNow MCP Server Bridges Snowflake and ServiceNow Data for Unified AI Queries

Developers have documented an architecture that connects Snowflake's Cortex Agent and ServiceNow's Knowledge Graph through ServiceNow's MCP Server, enabling a single AI agent to answer questions spanning both platforms. Hardware asset data is stored in Snowflake while software asset data resides in ServiceNow, but users can query both through one natural-language question. The MCP Server acts as a gateway, routing queries to the appropriate internal tool — either a subflow that invokes Snowflake's Cortex Agent or a ServiceNow Knowledge Graph search. Claude Code serves as the MCP Client, communicating with the server via OAuth authentication without needing to know where underlying data is stored. The setup allows a user to ask a question like 'What assets are managed by Tim?' and receive a consolidated answer drawn from both systems.

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Creative-OS Framework Aims to End Generic UI Design with Metadata-Driven Approach

Developer codebrak07 has released Creative-OS, an open-source design and engineering framework intended to help teams build visually distinct digital interfaces. The project addresses what its creator calls a homogenization problem in modern web design, where products increasingly share the same layouts, typography, and visual patterns. Rather than starting with a component library, Creative-OS asks teams to first define structured metadata — covering typography, color, layout density, and motion — that captures the intended visual identity of a product. These structured design decisions then serve as a bridge between creative direction and frontend implementation, keeping design intent explicit and consistent throughout development. The framework sits between brand strategy and engineering, aiming to make every interface intentional rather than simply assembled from familiar templates.