I was generally lucky with group project partners at school (both high school and college), I guess; I didn’t have much explicit conflict, and I never had one actually fall apart. There was one class in which I was in a group of three in which I did 95% of the work, one of the other two people did about 60% of the work, and the third guy basically didn’t show up, but I was okay with that. I wrote code that worked, the second guy supported me so I could write that code, and the third guy would have only gotten in the way anyway.
Edit: (Yes, that adds up to more than 100%, because of duplication of effort, inefficiency, correcting each other’s mistakes, etc. In other words, it’s a joke, along the lines of “First you do the first 80%, then you do the second 80%.”)
I interpreted that as “I did 95% of the work that I said I would do, and one of the other partners did 60% of the work that he committed to do, and the third partner didn’t do anything.” But yeah, if you interpret it as straight-up percentages, it doesn’t really add up...
I could’ve sworn there was a bit in the grandparent that acknowledged this apparent contradiction, and pointed out pair programming as the explanation, but it seems to be gone. That would, in any case, account for the percentages.
I was generally lucky with group project partners at school (both high school and college), I guess; I didn’t have much explicit conflict, and I never had one actually fall apart. There was one class in which I was in a group of three in which I did 95% of the work, one of the other two people did about 60% of the work, and the third guy basically didn’t show up, but I was okay with that. I wrote code that worked, the second guy supported me so I could write that code, and the third guy would have only gotten in the way anyway.
Edit: (Yes, that adds up to more than 100%, because of duplication of effort, inefficiency, correcting each other’s mistakes, etc. In other words, it’s a joke, along the lines of “First you do the first 80%, then you do the second 80%.”)
...?
I interpreted that as “I did 95% of the work that I said I would do, and one of the other partners did 60% of the work that he committed to do, and the third partner didn’t do anything.” But yeah, if you interpret it as straight-up percentages, it doesn’t really add up...
I read it as CronoDAS implying his group did 55% more work than it needed to, but your interpretation makes as much sense.
I could’ve sworn there was a bit in the grandparent that acknowledged this apparent contradiction, and pointed out pair programming as the explanation, but it seems to be gone. That would, in any case, account for the percentages.
Yeah, I don’t know what happened to that paragraph.