To extract clearer feedback: - Frame around "why": "What’s the risk if we keep this approach?" - Break into smaller asks: "Could you review just the error handling first?" reduces cognitive load. - Provide a template: "Use this format: Issue > Impact > Suggestion" structures responses. - Follow up iteratively: "I fixed X; does this address your concern about Y?" - Leverage rapport: "I value your expertise—could you elaborate on Z?" encourages investment. - Use non-confrontational language:"Help me understand…" avoids defensiveness. - Share context: "This is time-sensitive" or "We’re constrained by X" clarifies priorities.

I usually ask for clarification with specific questions to pinpoint the concern. If needed, I suggest a quick call to ensure alignment. When feedback is unclear, I restate my interpretation and ask if that’s what they meant. This keeps the process efficient and avoids unnecessary back-and-forth.

First off, I'm not afraid to ask for more. Like, "Hey, when you said 'readability could be improved,' could you point to a specific spot? Maybe a variable name or how I structured the function?" Just trying to get on the same page, you know? Sometimes, a quick chat's way faster than back-and-forth emails. I'll just suggest, "Hey, got a minute to walk through this feedback? Might be easier to talk it out." I'll also go back and look at older reviews or company coding guides. Maybe I missed something they always look for. If we're still not clicking, I'll just ask straight up, "Is there a better way for me to ask questions? Like, do you prefer bullet points or something?" Just trying to make it easier for both of us next time.

"Clarity comes from engagement, not from waiting for it to arrive." 🎯 Create a "feedback template" asking reviewers to provide specific examples for each point. 🎯 Schedule "code walkthrough sessions" where you explain your logic and invite targeted critique. 🎯 Implement a "traffic light system" asking reviewers to rate feedback urgency/importance. 🎯 Use "reverse code reviews" where you review their code to understand their standards. 🎯 Create "feedback tiers" asking reviewers to specify if issues are architectural, functional, or stylistic. 🎯 Establish "review buddies" who can help interpret feedback from more senior developers. 🎯 Remember: good feedback is a conversation, not a verdict.

Some of the best practices is to: 1. Do a thorough self review of your PR and proactively resolve the findings, better to do it even before opening the PR for other reviewers. 2. Try to note understand all the concerns of the reviewer and do a joint review over a call 3. Ask clear questions to them and put forth your idea of certain parts of the code, why you implemented in a certain way 4. It is better for both parties to check the DoD from the ticket and look for feasibility of scalability and runtime concerns Always try to discuss, negotiate proactively instead of waiting for the reviewer to explain everything.