Honest, constructive criticism is most helpful. Dishonest (as in "it's great" when it
ain't) or non-constructive (as in "I think it's amateurish" vs. some actual suggestion
for
change) appraisals are useless. Also, this is not a class wherein we are trying to weed
out the weak or prod the lazy because there are only so many class days. This is an
informal group where many of us want to improve, but we have no time table. Further,
though we all want to improve, many are also here for the participation and friendship
as
well. For many of us, this is a shared hobby. HOBBY!. As such, there is no place for
harshness created buy words which carry very unpleasant connotations. A little
diplomacy
never hurt anybody.
Har! Me talking about diplomacy! That's a hoot!
Regards,
Bob...
-------------------------------
"In the carboniferous epoch
we were promised perpetual peace.
They swore if we gave up our weapons
that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed they sold us,
and delivered us, bound, to our foe.
And the gods of the copybook headings said,
'Stick to the devil you know.' "
--Rudyard Kipling
From: "aimcompute" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I see a trend going here as well. Those who have been to some kind of
> formalized training seem to accept that a "contemptuous" style of critique
> is acceptable and normal.
>
> Those that have not, do not see it that way.
>
> The PDML/PUG is not a formalized training arena.
>
> Where does that leave us?
>
> Tom C.
>
> P.S. Even in a formalized arena, I would personally view the rough-edged
> words as an indication the instructor is just too d*** lazy to take the time
> to think before he speaks, or is just emulating the way he was taught.
> Dog-eat-dog world or not. That's only my opinion.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
