|
I've also considered stopping answering on QA. It's a real shame.
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
|
|
|
|
|
Keith Barrow wrote: The policy of non-engagement hasn't worked
It works for me: I don't waste time in such things anymore.
THESE PEOPLE REALLY BOTHER ME!! How can they know what you should do without knowing what you want done?!?!
-- C++ FQA Lite
|
|
|
|
|
 +1
My sentiments exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
I would have to agree with you. I actually find him to be quite reasonable and fair (at least most of the time). I can even find some of the replies about him here in the Lounge more rude then he ever was.
I also have seen much worse replies from the early days, when there wasn't much restrictions on how to reply.
|
|
|
|
|
Kenneth Haugland wrote: I can even find some of the replies about him here in the Lounge more rude then he ever was.
Yes, he can get blasted here sometimes. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who gives him the benefit of the doubt.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
I think you upvoted my massage, but someone has marked it as Spam/Abusive. Go figure.
PS. If it was you I must apologize 
|
|
|
|
|
I did upvote.
Someone marked it abusive? Must be a real hater I guess. 
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps it was SAK. Now, that would be really funny
Well, it cant be, then I would at least get an explanation 
|
|
|
|
|
Kenneth Haugland wrote: then I would at least get an explanation
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Kenneth Haugland wrote: I think you upvoted my massage, but someone has marked it as Spam/Abusive.
Damn! - what a difference a single letter makes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with the point about detailed explanations, but that doesn't excuse the snotty remarks. He frequently accuses posters of omitting details that I've seen in plain sight in their original post (read the f*@~!!! question!.
He constantly nit-picks about things that are actually Ear Elephant.
To me, anyway, the main point of QA is for those of us with experience to help those who are new at programming, or even just stuck on a thorny problem. It should be about giving and generosity and balancing our karma. I do suspect that there are some who do this to show off their own perceived superiority.
Programmers were often depicted as pizza munching, coke swilling, bespectacled nerds with no social skills. Our profession has moved on. I still have many pizza munching, coke swilling nerdy friends, but, by and large, they've all developed into well-rounded members of society who also follow sport, music and enjoy the odd joke.
This one seems to be a throwback.
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I think this is just being over sensitive. Right or wrong doesn't really matter, but a post about a post about a post is just a bit whiny don't ya think? Once again, I'm not necessarily agreeing with the guy, but in my experience a lot of people that spend too much time online just don't get it when it comes to dealing with people in the real world.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: a lot of people that spend too much time online just don't get it when it comes to dealing with people in the real world.
Very true.
|
|
|
|
|
Huh? The link goes nowhere comprehensible, so I assume the Admins took care of the problem. Good job, that.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
It still goes back to the message in Spam & Abuse Watch when I click it.
|
|
|
|
|
I find this discussion disturbing because I think it loses the focus on "member behavior" and degenerates into negative statements, and inferences, about the "character" of one CodeProject member.
I will repeat here (an excerpt from) what I said in my response to the OP of the linked-to thread on "Spam and Abuse Watch:"
To the extent we, all, can recognize the humanity behind the "screen name," be aware of cultural differences in discourse (especially for those who are not native English speakers), and avoid inferring character from behavior on-line and personally reacting as if others are making ad hominem arguments, or attacks ... well, what more can we do ?It never was, or will be, "perfect," but it is very, very good ... here on CodeProject :) It is almost certain I will fail to live up to this myself, frequently.
cheers, Bill
« I had therefore to remove knowledge, in order to make room for belief » Immanuel Kant
|
|
|
|
|
Good point. I do know one or two people here who, to my knowledge, have never fallen short of your ideal behaviour. I fail frequently.
|
|
|
|
|
Do you agree with Sheldon Cooper that Scientists are better than Engineers? 
|
|
|
|
|
Yes.
Alberto Brandolini: The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.
|
|
|
|
|
Why will that be? Engineers do, scientists just think! And then they come back and say, "Oh wait, what we said then was wrong! There is no dark matter, it's just space without light" *Leonard's voice*
|
|
|
|
|
Oso Oluwafemi Ebenezer wrote: "Oh wait, what we said then was wrong! There is no dark matter, it's just space without light"
That's part of what dark matter has always been (except that there is no space without light); it's just matter that we can't/don't see.
Now, if you were to question the Maths behind the calculation of how much dark matter there is (and, indeed, whether or not it exists at all), then I would be on your side,
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Oso Oluwafemi Ebenezer wrote: Why will that be? Engineers do, scientists just think!
So thinking is worse than doing. You work in IT - right? By this logic the Telephone sanitation engineers are "better" (to use your phrase - what do you mean by this?) than the philosphers, mathematicians and artists. You work in IT - right?
Oso Oluwafemi Ebenezer wrote: And then they come back and say, "Oh wait, what we said then was wrong!
So being able to disprove yourself & having the intellectual rigour to do so is a bad thing?
Alberto Brandolini: The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.
|
|
|
|
|
Keith Barrow wrote: So thinking is worse than doing
I didn't mean to imply thinking is worse compared to doing. Ofcourse as a software ENGINEER, you think alot and then DO!
Keith Barrow wrote: So being able to disprove yourself & having the intellectual rigour to do so is a bad thing?
No, it's not a bad thing but taken it for granted is bad! If you construct a skyscraper, you better not pray to disprove your calculations but till date I dont even know if sitting upright is the best or sitting with the "executive chair".
|
|
|
|
|
Sheldon Cooper does not exist.
The moron who plays him doesn't know his abstract numbers from his OO.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
