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 http://www.ptahhotep.com http://www.chiccantine.com/andypantry.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php