On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 at 08:52, Ethan Furman <et...@stoneleaf.us> wrote:
> In fact, when I first read Rhodri's post I thought it meant something along > the lines of: programming language -> pie in the sky perfection. Hence, it > is possible to be too terse. I feel that this discussion has got out of hand, and it would be good for everyone to take a breath and move on. However, *as a data point* I will say that I took Soni's original statement as being a mildly self-deprecating comment about a bit of code they had written (but hadn't, IIRC, actually quoted in the posting, just referred to), which in their view was not particularly clever but got the job done. I personally wouldn't have used the word "shitty" in an email, but I quite likely would have in spoken conversation, and I'm personally much more formal in email than when speaking, and I know many other people aren't. So I have no problem with Soni's use of the word. I took Rhodri's comment as a mild rebuke - worded as it was to be light-hearted and therefore not to be taken *too* seriously. Maybe he doesn't like the language himself, maybe he was enforcing a standard he felt was appropriate for the list, I don't know, and it doesn't really matter. His comment was brief, and full of cultural implications which (as an English person) I suspect I caught but which may have been missed by others who are from different backgrounds. Maybe it was a mistake being quite so colloquial, but it's an easy one to make if you're not spending inordinate amounts of time fine-tuning your emails. Steven's objection to "shaming", while maybe technically accurate, seemed to ignore a lot of the nuance. Maybe that's down to personality, or cultural differences. But I do think it failed to assume (or maybe "allow for the possibility of" would be more accurate) good intentions. But I'm fine with assuming that it was itself a well-intentioned attempt to caution people against giving offense, which didn't have the intended effect. Hopefully, if I've misinterpreted anyone's actual meaning in the above, I've erred on the side of assuming good intention. If anyone feels otherwise, I apologise. I suggest that any harm that might have been done by the original post is getting lost now in the increasing heat of the argument, and we'd be better if we simply let the debate drop at this point. Paul _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/HZR5WXRCPBOJZRS7ZJ52Z5SBDIZH5CNM/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
