In this stream, I'll start working on a feature to make it easier to throw an exception for a mocked member in Rocks.
https://github.com/JasonBock/Rocks/issues/413
#dotnet #csharp #roslyn
In this stream, I'll start working on a feature to make it easier to throw an exception for a mocked member in Rocks.
https://github.com/JasonBock/Rocks/issues/413
#dotnet #csharp #roslyn
This week, Paul and Marcus dig into why traditional user research repositories fail almost everyone in an organization, and how AI is quietly changing the game. There's also an App of the Month pick that's a little too on-the-nose, some pointed Google bashing, and a sheep-based punchline.
The pattern in most organizations is depressingly familiar: user research gets done, a PowerPoint gets presented to stakeholders, everyone nods along or ignores it entirely, and then the research disappears. It might prompt some short-term action, but the knowledge evaporates. Nobody references it again six months later.
The traditional solution has been to build a research repository: a central place to store everything from interviews and surveys to usability tests and diary studies. The problem is that these repositories almost always become what Paul generously describes as "dumping grounds." Dense folder structures, difficult navigation, and search tools that require you to already know what you're looking for make them practically unusable for anyone outside the UX team. And who ends up using them? Other UX professionals, the people who already understand the research anyway. Everyone else ignores them.
First, it makes the initial build far less painful. You can throw everything at it, PDFs, old PowerPoints, interview transcripts, survey exports, and AI will structure and organize that material into something coherent. What used to be a daunting, months-long project becomes manageable.
Second, it makes the repository accessible to people who aren't UX specialists. Instead of requiring a precise search query, a conversational interface lets anyone ask vague, natural questions. A product manager can ask "what do our users think about the checkout process?" and get a synthesized answer drawn from five different studies they never knew existed. That's a genuinely different kind of value.
Third, and this is the part Paul finds most compelling, it can identify gaps in your research. When someone asks the repository a question and there's no relevant research to draw on, a well-configured AI won't fabricate an answer. It flags the gap and notifies the UX team that this is an area worth investigating. Over time, the questions people ask become a demand-driven research roadmap, shaped by what people in the organization actually need to know rather than what the UX team assumes they need.
Marcus pushed back on the reliability question, which is fair given AI's well-documented habit of confidently inventing things. Paul's response: proper setup matters enormously. You instruct the AI explicitly not to fabricate, you add a quality gate that checks answers before they're returned, and you can even have it verify claims against source material. Even with pessimistic assumptions, say one in ten answers being wrong, that's still more useful than having nothing at all. And the failure mode is reassuring: if the AI can't find relevant research, it defaults to generic best practice rather than making something specific up about your users.
Paul then connected this to something he's discussed before: AI-powered virtual personas. The repository feeds the persona generation. AI analyzes the accumulated research and builds queryable personas from it. Unlike static persona documents that go stale almost immediately, these update as new research is added. And here's the detail Paul is clearly delighted by: put a QR code on your printed persona posters. Scan it, and you're now having a conversation with a virtual version of that persona. Marcus had recently written about the value of physical personas on walls as simple reminders of who you're designing for, and this neatly bridges the physical and digital.
The upshot: organizations that invest in an AI-powered research repository end up with something that prevents duplicate research, makes user insights accessible to everyone, identifies gaps in what's known, and gives the whole organization a quick way to gut-check decisions against actual user data. The reason more organizations aren't doing this, Paul notes with characteristic subtlety, is that UX teams are too small and too busy. "Hire me to do it" being the conclusion he arrived at, live on air.
Paul's pick this month is Notion, which he acknowledges he's almost certainly recommended before, given that he runs his entire business on it and describes its potential failure as roughly equivalent to his own. The recommendation here is specific though: Notion as the platform for building AI-powered user research repositories.
Two things make it well-suited for this. First, structural flexibility: you can organize a repository however your organization needs, and bring in almost any format of research artifact. Second, Notion has a powerful built-in AI agent that can reference, search, and synthesize across everything stored in it.
That said, Paul mentioned conversations with the RNLI, who use SharePoint and Copilot to achieve essentially the same thing. The principle works across platforms. Notion is Paul's preference, but he'd be the first to acknowledge the bias.
Dan at Headscape surfaced this one. Google has been quietly rewriting the titles of content in its search results, not a new practice, but one that has apparently accelerated significantly with the arrival of Gemini. The example from the article: a piece originally titled "I used the cheat on everything AI tool, and it didn't help me cheat on anything" was shortened to "cheat on everything AI tool." The meaning flips completely. Paul's view: this isn't really an AI problem so much as a "no human in the loop" problem. Remove human judgment from the process and you get outcomes like this.
This one prompted a longer and more genuinely interesting conversation. The article references New York Times analysis suggesting Google's AI overviews are incorrect around 10% of the time. The illustrative example: AI Overview cited three sources to answer a question about when Bob Marley's home became a museum. Two of the sources didn't address the date at all. The third, Wikipedia, listed two contradictory years, and AI confidently picked the wrong one.
Paul and Marcus ended up in partial agreement. Paul's argument: we don't hold websites to a higher standard of accuracy than we hold AI, and the expectation of AI infallibility is inconsistent. The real issue is the word "confidently." AI states things with a certainty it hasn't earned, and the interface doesn't adequately signal uncertainty. Marcus's counter: AI summaries have effectively removed the click-through step, so an error now goes unchecked in a way a traditional search result didn't. They concluded it's largely a user interface problem, acknowledged that Google isn't going to remove the feature, and briefly proposed a BBC-funded public search engine before moving on.
I'm entering the annual Give Helium to a Sheep contest again, and I'm a bit nervous. Last year the bar was very high.
Read the full Show Notes and search through the world's largest audio library on Agile and Scrum directly on the Scrum Master Toolbox Podcast website: http://bit.ly/SMTP_ShowNotes.
"The team was like birds in a nest waiting to get fed — completely dependent on the PO for every piece of work." - Christian Thordal
Christian tells us about a team that always appeared busy but was hiding serious dysfunction behind a single healthy metric. When he rated the system across his domain, he found the team scored low in process maturity, effectiveness, and learning — yet their cycle time looked good. The team claimed to practice Kanban, but in reality it meant "we can do whatever we want." Daily standups had become social check-ins. The backlog held over 100 items to do and 50+ in progress, most of them just headlines with no descriptions. Real work assignments happened through 30-minute Slack huddles between the PO and individual developers — pure push, no prioritization. Despite having OKRs, the team could only plan a week ahead. Christian's fix was radical: he restarted the backlog entirely, cutting 150 items down to roughly 30, established WIP limits to create a pull-based system, and brought the team into the process as active participants rather than passive recipients.
In this segment, we refer to Kanban and OKRs.
Self-reflection Question: When was the last time you looked beyond a single "green" metric to understand what was really happening in your team's workflow?
Christian recommends Turn the Ship Around by David Marquet, a former U.S. Navy submarine commander who transformed his crew's performance by replacing permission-seeking with intent-based leadership. Instead of waiting for orders, crew members were expected to say "I intend to..." — transferring ownership and making people accountable for their decisions. Christian says this deeply resonated with his own military background in the Danish Army, where leadership operated on similar principles. The book's core message — stop creating dependency and start building leaders at every level — connects directly to the team story in this episode, where passive dependency on the PO was the root of the dysfunction. You can also listen to previous episodes with David Marquet and explore more on intent-based leadership.
[The Scrum Master Toolbox Podcast Recommends]
Angela thought she was just there to coach a team. But now, she's caught in the middle of a corporate espionage drama that could make or break the future of digital banking. Can she help the team regain their mojo and outwit their rivals, or will the competition crush their ambitions? As alliances shift and the pressure builds, one thing becomes clear: this isn't just about the product—it's about the people.
🚨 Will Angela's coaching be enough? Find out in Shift: From Product to People—the gripping story of high-stakes innovation and corporate intrigue.
[The Scrum Master Toolbox Podcast Recommends]
About Christian Thordal
Christian Thordal is a former Danish Army officer turned Agile Coach. He works with leaders and teams to create clarity, accountability, and momentum in complex organizations. His approach blends military leadership principles with modern product development, helping organizations move from discussion and strategy to real execution and measurable results.
You can link with Christian Thordal on LinkedIn.
1186. This week, we look at why the word "troops" is surprisingly ambiguous and what style guides say about using it to refer to individual service members. Then, we look at why spelling bees are called "bees" and explore fun bee-related phrases like "a bee in your bonnet," "make a beeline," and "put the bee on someone."
🔗 Join the Grammar Girl Patreon.
🔗 Share your familect recording in Speakpipe or by leaving a voicemail at 833-214-GIRL (833-214-4475)
🔗 Watch my LinkedIn Learning writing courses.
🔗 Subscribe to the newsletter.
🔗 Find an edited transcript.
🔗 Get Grammar Girl books.
| HOST: Mignon Fogarty
| Grammar Girl is part of the Quick and Dirty Tips podcast network.
| Theme music by Catherine Rannus.
| Grammar Girl Social Media: YouTube. TikTok. Facebook. Threads. Instagram. LinkedIn. Mastodon. Bluesky.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
AI is moving fast, which means a lot of us are trying to keep up in real time.
I keep hearing the same questions: Where do I even start? How do I know what to focus on? Am I too late?
If you’ve been thinking, I should probably work on my AI skills, you’re in the right place.
It’s free. It’s online. And everyone’s invited. Whether you’re a developer, business leader, student, or somewhere in between, there’s content tailored to your role and your comfort level with AI. That includes everything from deep technical skills for IT, data, and security pros to practical skills for marketing and customer service experts, plus much more.
AI Skills Fest is powered by AI Skills Navigator, your one-stop shop for AI learning. You’ll find quick-hit sessions, expert talks, live shows, and skilling playlists built around real work.
The point of the week? Helping you make real progress with AI—not just building awareness. That means:
Yes, I said fun! It’s a festival, after all.
The satisfaction of learning a new skill is always great. But the feeling you get when it all comes together—and you win something, too—is even better.
* Friendly fine print: Terms and conditions apply. Sweepstakes, prizes, and Certification exam vouchers are subject to eligibility requirements and other restrictions.
AI Skills Fest is a choose-your-own-adventure week, but it’s not a scavenger hunt. We guide you with clear paths so you don’t have to guess what to do next.
Depending on where you are, you may also find local skilling activities, designed for different regions, time zones, and languages, delivered by Microsoft Training Services Partners (TSPs).
Our hope is that you leave with skills you can actually use, along with a clearer sense of when to lean on AI and when to lean on those human skills that AI can’t replace.
If you’re a business professional, you don’t just need “extra time.” You need steps that fit real life. Learn simple but powerful ways to use AI in everyday work, like drafting the first version of a brief, making research more efficient, or responding faster to customers.
If you lead a team or a business, you’re setting the tone for others. And you’re trying to lead practical change, not chase hype. Use the week as a jump-start for you and your team. Learn together, build a shared baseline, and turn “we should be putting AI to better use” into something concrete.
If you’re a developer, you’re either already building with AI or you want to build with AI. Dig into AI-assisted coding, create agents, and take on a hackathon-style challenge—perfect if you enjoy friendly competition (and maybe some bragging rights).
If you’re in IT, data, or security, AI is landing on your desk from every direction. Get grounded in the essentials: AI-ready Azure basics, agents, data governance, and fundamentals for securing AI solutions end to end.
If you’re a student or educator, AI is becoming part of your classes and your career. Learn responsible ways to use AI for learning, teaching, and research. And see what AI skills can look like as you figure out and prepare for what’s next.
If you’ve been meaning to get more hands-on with AI, this is your week.
Register for AI Skills Fest now. Mark your calendar for a couple of sessions. Bring a teammate. Make it a thing.
And, if you like details, we’ve got you. Next week, we’ll share a guide to the different AI Skills Fest moments and opportunities, along with a downloadable calendar so you can find your favorites and block out the time. Plus, we’ll be announcing some of the star speakers who are headlining AI Skills Fest. You won’t want to miss it!

Apple has published the full schedule for its Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC26), which runs from June 8 to June 12 2026.
The event begins on Monday with the keynote and the Platforms State of the Union. Throughout the rest of the week, developers can watch more than 100 technical session videos, participate in live Group Labs, and book one‑on‑one appointments with Apple experts.
The conference is free and will be streamed online, with a limited in‑person event at Apple Park on the opening day.
Developers can now browse the complete lineup of Group Labs covering topics such as Apple Intelligence, developer tools, design, graphics & games, and machine learning.
Sign‑ups are open for one‑on‑one sessions, and Apple engineers will be available on the Developer Forums to answer questions throughout the week.
Relevant Links
WWDC26 overview and schedule
https://developer.apple.com/wwdc26/
Group Labs schedule and registration
https://developer.apple.com/wwdc26/schedule/group-labs
Apple’s WWDC26 press release
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/03/apples-worldwide-developers-conference-returns-the-week-of-june-8/