Re: Why do I bother?
On Saturday 25 February 2006 04:38, Andrew Cady wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 04:52:25PM +0800, Alex Nordstrom wrote:
> > (CCing you because you request it.)
>
> Did not. (No bother).
>
> > Saturday, 25 February 2006 15:40, Andrew Cady wrote:
> > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 02:27:02AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote:
> > > > On Saturday 25 February 2006 02:14, Andrew Cady wrote:
> > > > > If reinstalling the OS is the only thing you ever try to fix
> > > > > a problem, then you should be using Windows. Unix is not for
> > > > > you.
> > > >
> > > > Please don't be a troll.
> > >
> > > Trolled is more like it.
> >
> > That is no better.
>
> Admittedly not.
>
> > You have failed to address the core question of why you chose
> > to respond at all when the response you had to offer was not
> > constructive.
>
> OP did not merely betray cluelessness -- that would not bother me --
> but proceeded to blame on Debian what is his own fault. If OP is in
> fact willing to go beyond reinstall, the statement does not apply.
> Is it really so controversial? Unix is not for everyone.
And are we doing any better when we start blaming him? He's working
with discs that are 3 years old and having problems. Does he need more
help or criticism? Which one will be more likely to encourage him and
other newbies on the list to have a positive opinion of Debian and
which will likely drive him away (and his friends when he talks about
it -- as well as other newbies on the list)?
> > That is not the purpose of this list.
>
> Nor is this.
This is leading to the purpose of this list: TO HELP PEOPLE. That is
the purpose. Not to make things worse for people. Rather than
helping, you hindered, and you're being confronted for it. Not because
you're a bad person, but because your actions are contrary to the
purpose of this list, so several of us dared to defend the person who
needed help and draw a limit and say, "Deriding people instead of
helping him is not the purpose of this list." If you had seen that was
the point of MY first response to you, it would have ended right there.
After that I took it off list. If you had not made the effort, ON
LIST, to continue to defend an action that is rude and indefensible,
these posts would never have been made.
You've proven, in posts on other threads to be quite helpful. DU needs
that, but does not need spiteful responses. You can accept that and
move on, or spend your time trying to defend a mistake. Every action
we make defines who we are and shows the world what our priorities are.
In this case, do you want to continue to say it was okay to respond
negatively to an old thread that had already mentioned that issue, or
do you want to accept it was a negative act and move on? Which action
do you want to select to define and show who you are?
Hal
Reply to: