Opposite of CriticizeBluntly
. Excess bluntness usually just results in flame-wars.
- Blunt: "Only lazy and unprofessional developers do X".
- Smoother: "I believe that practice X is a result of people getting a little too comfortable, resulting in risky shortcuts."
- Problem: Doesn't at all mean the same thing. The latter indicates belief that the behavior is the result of comfort in experience. The former indicates belief that the behavior is the result of inexperience or negligence.
- Even if true, our main purpose should be to remind people going forward, not pass judgement. Some "beliefs" should be kept to oneself.
- Blunt: "You made such a mess out of this topic, you slob!"
- Smoother: "This topic has grown a bit messy. Here's an outline for a suggested refactoring..."
- Problem: Commits oneself to refactoring. Might as well JustDoIt.
- Blunt: "Doctor X is 100 times smarter than you'll ever be."
- Smoother: "I highly respect Doctor X's work and trust his/her opinion."
- Problem: None (since the original claim was a gross exaggeration anyway - CriticizeBluntly demands honesty.)
- It's only a hypothetical example not meant to document an existing event.
- Blunt: "That's not what I meant, you blind idiot. Read it again!"
- Smoother: "It seems there is a misunderstanding. Let me attempt to rephrase it..."
- Problem: After the fifth or sixth time you've rephrased it for someone who really is a blind idiot. Some people don't even want to comprehend it. In such cases insults are not likely to change such behavior or make them better readers. The choices are 1) continue to insult, 2) leave the discussion, 3) try to rephrase it yet again. If #3 isn't working and #1 isn't working (and making wiki unpleasant), then 2 looks like your best bet.
- Politely leaving the conversation may indeed be another diplomatic option.
- Blunt: "Go read Doctor X's book so I don't have to spoon-feed your empty pinhead!"
- Smoother: "I recommend you read Doctor X's book. I don't have the time right now to paraphrase it here."
- Problem: Other person crows victory about BookStop and thumbs his nose at academia and ivory towers. Just you try and continue to remain smooth...
- If you get roiled over their crowing, then the problem may be with you. Diplomacy sometimes requires duck feathers in that you should ideally let the rain just bounce off your back and politely move on. This topic is not "how to get even".
I moved the ThreadMode
and summarized the key points which were none in the latter case (I believe, fix if I'm wrong). I did so this early because the presentation is otherwise very good.
In my opinion, the "problem" sentences should also be part of the move. They are too specific and "bickery" to belong here.
Your opinion is not shared. The fact that a 'problem' can be offered for each 'example' is just as telling as having the examples in the first place. If the 'problem' sentences are moved, the examples will be moved too.
Have you done a survey? What is the scope of this non-shared-ness?
I don't share your opinion, so your opinion is not shared. Whomever moved the ThreadMode
also didn't share your opinion. We're at least 2:1 on the opinion issue. But opinions aren't relevant; you're not even respected: I don't consider anything you say that starts with "In my opinion" to be worth the e-scrap it's written on. "In my opinion" it should be deleted the moment you say it, but I know people with your sort of pride wouldn't let that go (you value your opinion too much - you wouldn't have blabbed about it otherwise) so it's better to let the wiki-gnomes handle it in a few years when you won't immediately enter some sort of reptilian attack-mode.
This is not use-able information to me. For one, "not respected" is not the same as "not wrong". And, I used to get a lot of "fan mail" for "putting up" with firey OO proponents when I had a public email address, including an editor of a magazine and a separate O'reilly book author. Those who call me bunches of names are likely just e-bullies. The zealot-to-evidence ratio is sky high on the web. If typing "in my opinion" is the biggest complaint you have against me, then I have nothing of substance to take from that. -- top
Whatever. None of your self-adulation is relevant. And "not respected" means your opinion holds about zero
weight, as do your subjective views. It doesn't mean you're wrong, but it does mean that you're diluting and thus reducing the total value of every page on which you express your opinion. If you have a valid argument, make it. Opinions are like assholes - everybody has one, and attempting to share them just makes a mess. Keep your opinions to yourself.
Until software engineering becomes a real science, opinions are just about all we have. It is not my fault that EverythingIsRelative. I'm just the messenger.
is a straightforward contradiction, a lie, and an excuse you use to hold onto other lies. And we certainly have more than opinions - we have observations over some things, proofs over others, tests and a wide array of example programs already in the wild. How many more untruths will you tell today, messenger? And for whom are you delivering these messages?
If we filtered out all the poor science and non-science, C2 would probably be like 5 pages. (And the formal-proof weenies over-extrapolate their pet theories and have thin or convoluted connectivity to customer wants.)
No, opinions are not all that we have. Relational theory is an example. And it is absolutely disgusting that you cannot see this - being a follower of relational yourself! Stop denying theory and consider that YOU have your own little pet theories that YOU push: table oriented programming.
I don't deny that theory has use, its just not proof *by itself* of anything objective.
Also, please do not flame people with words such as "formal proof weenies" and "pet theories" and then go off and claim that OTHER PEOPLE are rude, arrogant, or inflammatory. Please do invest your money into a clear, chrome, shiny mirror.
Sometimes I slip and act like you guys.
Sometimes I act like me, too.
See also: AssumeGoodFaith