Re: Great SWT Program

In article <1188951290.635029.298240@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Twisted <twisted0n3@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 3, 1:57 pm, blm...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <blm...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You don't need to "find out" whether my characterization was accurate;
just accept that it surely was, and move on.

I'm not sure whether to laugh or shake my head in amazement at
the arrogance of the above sentence.

Ex-fucking-SCUSE-me? Now you're calling me names. :P And all because I
said something that, though more verbose, boils down to "I am not a
liar". :P

Even though in most of the cases in which I *have* looked at
the previous post, I've found myself disagreeing with your
characterization?

Are you, then, calling me a liar? :P

Previously responded to. Now for the other things I was going
to say ....

(There's an excellent example in the thread with subject line
'Post not appear on group "comp.lang.java.programmer"'; you label
a post from Arne [*], which I'd have said was mostly about FSF
and copyright, with a "PS" to you that was a mild corrective, an
"attack post".)

I labeled it an attack post because it was -- its pure purpose was to
indirectly slander me by contradicting most of my previous post and
implying that I was some sort of ignoramus in the bargain. That almost
nothing in it failed to imply something negative about me, while at
the same time nothing at all in it was Java-related, is sufficient for
my purposes.

Nevertheless, labeling it an "attack post" without quoting any of it
leaves the impression -- to me anyway -- that it was nothing but
personal attacks and name-calling, which -- oh well, maybe that *is*
what you think.

Your criteria obviously allow an attacker to slip subtle but serious
put-downs under your radar by simply making their claims indirectly by
implication instead of explicitly, which doesn't do a whole lot of
good.

My criteria? Huh?

[*] Whose last name I'm not including because I'm not sure how
to include the required non-ASCII characters. My fault for
not knowing enough about relevant standards and how to make my
preferred tools meet them, but I don't want to let it hold up
this Critically! Important! post. :-)?

There's alt-numpad and CharMap copy/paste, but it's a pain.
Attributions and such are generated automatically and people enter
their From: info into their news agent just once, so it's not so
awkward there of course.

What is this CharMap of which you speak? Googling .... Okay,
maybe there's more than one thing by that name, at least one of
which would work under my preferred operating system. I'm still
a little dubious about what those preferred tools of mine [*] would
do with Unicode characters, or anything other than 7-bit ASCII.

[*] vim and trn, under Linux. Yes, really. (Just curious --
what were you thinking I was using?)

[ snip ]

Some assessment
of blame may contribute to an understanding of what went wrong and
how to avoid things going wrong in the future. Too much attention
to whose fault it was -- to me it seems more likely to result
in pointless arguing than to productive discussion. I admit
that I'm often guilty myself of taking criticism personally and
reacting defensively in a way that doesn't advance the discussion.
But I try not to.

Eh? I thought you said the problem was people dishing out personal
criticism where not warranted. Now you're saying that instead the
problem is people not simply rolling over and taking whatever punches
are thrown their way?

Actually what I had in mind is that discussion can descend into
unproductive wrangling when someone starts dishing out personal
insults, and also when someone responds to any criticism by
defending his/her behavior. You can label the latter refusing to
roll over and take whatever. Generally speaking, I wouldn't.

I know which of those seemed to me to make more sense. :P

[ snip ]

But you know, I think we've been over this ground, or similar
ground, before -- a long thread some months ago in which I
suggested, as I'm doing here, that you consider altering your
behavior.

Nothing in my behavior needs any altering. To suggest otherwise is to
insult me.

[insults my mental health]

Well, I'd say I'm suggesting not that you not use your wits,
but that you use them differently.

"Differently" how?

By recognizing that your perception of how humans interact is
distorted, and adopting a more accurate view.

I know, I just insulted you, by your definition of "insult" anyway.
My mileage varies -- when I'm doing something that strikes other
people as counterproductive, in general I'd probably rather hear
about it than not. It's then up to me whether I want to change
my behavior, disagree with the person making the criticism (if one
can call it that), or tell them "you may be right, but I'm probably
not going to change", with or without an explanation of why.

[ snip ]

--
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.
.

Quantcast