Programming

I appreciate this sentiment a great deal in general, but sometimes it is difficult to uphold when I have to regularly deal with "time vampires" who not only require that I explain the same thing to them over and over again beyond reason but who also show no willingness or ability to actually learn the thing that I am explaining to them; at some point I just run out of patience and start ignoring them to the extent that I am able.

I actually was a teacher for a while (Computer Science and Maths), and I still do tutoring. When I started working with Xamarin, with no prior .NET/C#/GUI experience (just shell scripts and programs in DOS and Unix), it became clear as day to me that no-one at Microsoft had the slightest idea how to teach things. That hasn't changed even now. The documentation is horrendous - they don't even follow basic grammar rules like spell out an acronym in full the first time, so first time you hit one and you don't know what it is, now the document is useless (because they haven't linked to any assumed background knowledge either - have you tried Googling COM to find out what it is?). When I told someone there (who I won't name) they said "it's near impossible to cater for all levels". No it isn't - you start with the fundamentals (or link to them) and build your way up to the more advanced.

Microsoft documentation...

Here's my blog on writing a MAUI UI in C# which illustrates how to write a document (though I realised later I missed linking a few things and still need to go back and fix those) - Creating MAUI UI's in C#

It's also an issue with their templates - there's no such thing as a "blank" MAUI app. They stuff a bunch of stuff in there which violates "teach one concept at a time". I was so relieved when I found out how to make my own templates! (shell be gone! XAML be gone!)

Here are the basic rules of teaching...

I would add to that (for documentation) always spell out your acronyms in full the first time, link to any assumed knowledge, have step-by-step instructions, and make sure you cover different uses from basic to advanced (and don't damn well use Foo Bar - use a real world example).

I resonate a lot with the point about teaching. Honestly if it wasn't because teachers are woefully underpaid, I would've become a teacher probably. Instead I am left with being a software developer who gets excited every time I can introduce a coworker to a new concept.

This should be used in all areas.

I used to work in public health and I'd see people who had certifications [not college degrees] talking down to patients, and top doctors who were happy to explain things.

I love this.

Usually when I encounter folks who are tired of explaining things to peers, the issue is with them not having strong teaching skills.

Not being good at teaching is perfectly fine for a regular team member. But on my teams, senior title means doing mentorship. And lead title means doing Mentorship often and well.

I've inherited a team lead who was frustrated with how much of his time I expected him to spend mentoring. (I would not have promoted him to that level, prematurely, but he already had the title when I was hired to save the team.)

My response for him (in private one on one) boiled down to "get good, newbie, or there's the door". Anyone on my team with a senior or lead title is expected to prioritize teaching and mentorship. If they want to spend less time doing mentorship, they can either get really good at it, or find a team that fits them better.

Of course, I rarely hire unteachable folks, and I do fire them if needed. I know we've all worked with someone that makes us think "what about this clown?"

Edit: The ending of my annecdote is that team lead improved at mentorship dramatically, and discovered that his effective influence on the team increased dramatically in lock-step.