On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:50:14AM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2004-03-11 10:48:54 +0000 Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>
> wrote:
> >Trying to talk to people without referring to people directly makes
> >things unnecessarily difficult. Avoiding making individuals the focus of a
> >thread is both more obnoxious, and easier to avoid without causing problems.
> Is it really significantly more obnoxious?
I certainly find Thomas' thread much more obnoxious than your use of
the word "your" to single out the mail you were replying to.
> At least it means you have
> to concentrate on the topic and "play the ball, not the man", which
> some have trouble with.
Sure, but sometimes to do that you have to refer to specific instances
as examples to get a grip on what you're talking about. Singling out
individuals in that way certainly can cross the line into being needlessly
offensive, but it certainly seems reasonable to do it occassionally.
> >(And anyway, the "you" from my mail quoted above is an impersonal you,
> >synonymous with "one", so isn't on point for your complaint.)
> They're indistinguishable [...]
Uh, no they're not. It's possible to mistake one for the other, sure,
but that's a long way from indistinguishable. Too much hyperbole can be
a bad thing too.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we could.
http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature