Daniel Brown wrote:
>     [Inhales....]
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 01:01, PJ <af.gour...@videotron.ca> wrote:
>> Ok. You asked for it... I have to rant a bit get this off my chest as it
>> has been bugging me for a while and this is not directed at anyone in
>> particular.
>     I'm noting "for a while here...."
>> I do not appreciate it when there is doubt cast on my credibility. If I
>> say that I am getting a different output from Google, for example, the
>> that is what I am getting! And I certainly do not need to be told in
>> sopohomoric terms what Google is or how it works - I am not that
>> ignorant. Perhaps one should check as to what the input to Google was -
>> to compare and find why there might be a discrepancy. This is jumping to
>> conclusions without proper empirical research.
>     First of all, Sally (it's not directed at you, PJ), if you want to
> say that you're not casting this toward anyone, don't make it so
> blindingly obvious.  I'm the one who said it, and I stand absolutely,
> completely, and FIRMLY behind it.  You are just one of many, many,
> many people who come through here asking extremely basic questions on
> a list that assumes - yes, *assumes* - some prior technical knowledge.
>  It is a technical list, not a "Complete Idiot's Guide to Keyboard
> Character Mapping."  Now, by no means whatsoever does that insinuate
> that I think you're an idiot, so if you're not familiar with the
> series of books, don't take the title to heart; the publisher was not
> thinking of you and your feelings when they put it on paper.
>     Secondly, if you are getting a different response from Google,
> Sally, then you didn't use the same input, and thus you may very well
> need an explanation as to what a search engine is and how to use it
> --- and it may very well make you ignorant.  People use "ignorant"
> interchangeably with "moronic" or "inept," when it means nothing more
> than that you were unaware or uninformed.  Ignorance is not always the
> fault of the ignorant.
>     Thirdly:
>         > Perhaps one should check as to what the input to Google was -
>         > to compare and find why there might be a discrepancy. This
> is jumping to
>         > conclusions without proper empirical research.
>     Considering I *gave* PJ the search term to use at input, I'll
> consider my research to be done, complete and accurate, to the best of
> my knowledge and the collective knowledge of the community, as it's
> publicly-archived in its entirety.  It's not jumping to conclusions
> when the conclusions were already at our feet from the beginning.  The
> answer was there before he even asked the question.
>> Now, that I am started, I do notice that sometimes, in response to my
>> questions, responders have not grasped the entire problem and pick on
>> some small detail as a typo and forget the larger picture. I understand
>> the importance of the details and the consequences of misplaced dots and
>> other glitches (see "Brazil" the movie). I know I am rather impatient
>> and thus make hasty typos; but I must note that I have also had answers
>> that were flawed and where glitches were not caught; luckily, I did
>> resolve problem by trying various alternatives. I guess I just don't
>> like to be thought of as some bimbo.
>     I read through all 157 of your posts to the various lists.  Yes,
> exactly 157.  The responses you got from the PHP list in particular in
> your rare and sporadic posts since 2007 were technical responses,
> perhaps of varying quality, but DAMN good for an all-volunteer
> community.  If you made a typo, big deal --- it happens.  If someone
> chooses to "pick on it," then go have a nice cry and come back fresh.
> It's not at all minimizing your skill and ability, nor making you look
> like a "bimbo."
>     If you expect to receive *only* high-quality answers and will
> criticize those who give you answers that are "flawed and where
> glitches were not caught," then I highly suggest that you continue to
> "resolve problems by trying various alternatives," because I can speak
> very loudly for the community and say that you would never be welcome
> here with an attitude like that, unless your words haven't properly
> captured what you're trying to convey.
>     This list has people in a wide array of stages in the programming
> and development education life-cycle, from "just doing the research"
> to "this is the sixth programming language I've truly mastered and use
> daily."  Further, everyone here is a VOLUNTEER --- a word that has to
> be kept in mind.  If you don't like a response and have a gripe, hire
> someone to help you and then you can be more than justified in
> complaining.
>> In defense of my non-bimbo-ism, I have may accomplishments to my credit
> [snip=irrelevant]
>> so, there... :-P
>     Yeah.
>> And now for the cherry on top of the cake....
> [snip=politics]
>     I may agree, I may disagree, or align/counter-align with different
> points, but I have no issue in that.  I love the argument of politics
> regardless of the angle, if a person is willing to debate back and
> forth and not just assert their beliefs as the *only* answer (which
> you did not, by the way, you were asserting a well-formed opinion
> here).
>> That's it! To all who read this... have fun digesting and I hope it
>> provokes you all to do some serious thinking. As for me, :-X  .
>     It does.  It has me going back to that "for a while here" part at
> the beginning.  I'm not sure where the "while" part comes into play,
> as you haven't been around very often or for very long.   And in that
> time, every post and every response was always professional and
> on-track, up to this thread.  Like it or not, some of your questions
> were of a 'technologically-juvenile' nature, and the touting of your
> "experience" just prodded it further along; if it seems like a joke,
> someone is going to laugh.  Note the tenor of the thread up until you
> mentioned that you couldn't find the backtick key on the keyboard:
> professional, helpful, and to the point.  After that it was still
> light, playful, and in jest --- not for you to take to heart, Sally.
>     And in the spirit of quoting (a favorite pastime, I see):
>         "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open
> one's mouth and remove all doubt."
>     It's fine to poke and prod people, and I have no problem with it
> if done to me in play (I do it to Rob all the time, and he does it
> back, for example.... and I would like to think that we work together
> in the community just fine.... he's a good guy), but I'll advise you
> not to take it personally, and not to in-turn attack the free,
> good-faith answers you received from folks in times past.  If you
> think that someone's words here make you look like less than how you
> see yourself, does it really matter?  Unless they're convincing you,
> they'll just be a dead man's words to deaf ears some day.
>     The way I see it, life is little more than a game played in a
> dream; win or lose, it's still going to end, so enjoy it while it
> lasts.
Right on.  Good comments.
No offense taken and none intended.
I am enoying the list and will continue to participate, if i may.
I have learned a great deal already and really do appreciate the help.

unheralded genius: "A clean desk is the sign of a dull mind. "
Phil Jourdan --- p...@ptahhotep.com

PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to