Re: Can we tag [T]echnical posts?
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 11:15:17AM -0500, Wayne Topa wrote:
> Monique Y. Herman(spam@bounceswoosh.org) is reported to have said:
> > I understand that you're trying to better the list, and I appreciate
> > that, but your attitude is a total turnoff. Have you ever heard the
> > saying, "You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar"? i
> >
> > If you want to influence people, craft your sentences so that they
> > garner respect, not derision.
>
> I find that comment applies more to your posts the it does to Karsten.
>
> I believe you are rather new to this list. I have been on d-u for
> over 6 years and find that Karsten is a big contributor, both in
> Technical expertise and on-target criticism, and have no problem with
> his attitude whatsoever. You might feel that way because you are a
> contributor the the OT threads, which I can't check here, as I have
> deleted them all as they grow and have no wish to check the archives.
I agree with Monique here. I like Karsten, and his posts are almost
invariably accurate and often very helpful. However, they make
consistent and significant use of the passive voice to convert opinion
into fact ("foo is deprecated", "bar is considered incorrect", that kind
of phrasing) and frequently come across to me as lecturing. Several
times in the last couple of weeks alone I've found myself thinking "hey,
that was a curt reply; if I'd been the target of that I'd have felt hard
done by".
Possibly this is an artifact of his rant-o-matics, which are written in
an essay form whose register I find much too high for replies to
innocent posters on a mailing list. I'd be perfectly willing to admit
that I occasionally sound similar myself when I get fed up with
something, but I try to keep my tone more informal and friendly where I
can and would appreciate being told when I'm too high-handed.
I'm not new to this list, so I hope that I'm immune to that particular
ad hominem.
> The threads he mentions have been way OT and IMHO do not belong on d-u.
I fully agree with the sentiment, just not the approach.
Cheers,
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: