An AI researcher's frustrated blog post about meeting requests has ignited a heated discussion in the tech community about professional boundaries, time management, and the proper etiquette for requesting meetings with busy experts. The post, which details a series of increasingly annoying behaviors from people seeking meetings, has resonated with many professionals while also drawing criticism for its tone.
The original complaint centers around a common scenario: someone reaches out for a meeting, then immediately tries to change the proposed time, asks the expert to create calendar invites, and gets time zones wrong. What started as a simple scheduling conversation becomes a multi-step negotiation that places the burden of work on the person being asked for their time.
Professional Meeting Request Best Practices:
- Be flexible with proposed meeting times
- Send calendar invites in the recipient's time zone
- Handle your own scheduling logistics when requesting meetings
- Consider the time investment you're asking from the other person
Community Solutions Emerge from Frustration
The discussion has revealed practical solutions that many professionals are already using. Several community members pointed to scheduling tools like Calendly and Cal.com as effective ways to eliminate the back-and-forth negotiation. These platforms allow busy professionals to set their availability upfront and let meeting requesters choose from available slots, automatically handling time zones and calendar invites.
One commenter noted that this approach feels much more professional than haggling over details, especially since these situations happen frequently enough to warrant systematic solutions. The tools essentially shift the scheduling burden back to the person requesting the meeting while maintaining a professional appearance.
Popular Scheduling Solutions Mentioned:
- Calendly - Web-based scheduling platform
- Cal.com - Open-source scheduling alternative
- Fantastical (macOS) - Calendar app with built-in scheduling features
Professional Boundaries vs. Accessibility Debate
The post has sparked a broader conversation about how accessible experts should be to their communities. Some commenters suggested adopting a consulting model, treating all meeting requests as paid consultations similar to how doctors, lawyers, and other professionals operate. This approach would naturally filter out casual requests while compensating experts for their time.
However, others argued that openness and knowledge sharing are important parts of professional culture, particularly in tech hubs like the Bay Area. They emphasized that many successful professionals have benefited from free meetings with experts earlier in their careers and feel obligated to pay it forward.
Tone and Approach Under Scrutiny
While many sympathized with the scheduling frustrations, some community members criticized the confrontational tone of the original post. Critics described it as unnecessarily harsh and suggested that systemic solutions work better than public complaints. The sentiment was that if dealing with people's scheduling quirks is part of the job, then professionals need better processes rather than public rants.
You won't change the masses, you need to change the procedure to accommodate the masses.
The discussion also touched on whether this type of complaint belongs in professional forums, with some comparing it to common reference pages like nohello.net that address frequent communication issues in tech communities.
The debate ultimately highlights a common challenge in professional life: balancing accessibility and expertise sharing with personal time management and respect. While the original post may have been blunt, it has sparked useful conversations about better practices for both meeting requesters and busy professionals.
Reference: You want to meet me, don't make me work for it.md