| |
This is tough but I think its a worthy discussion...
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> I think Todd got "played". (And I recently said I didn't think Todd was easy
> to fool)
With all due respect to Todd, I think Larry is right to an extent. I told Todd
in a private E-mail that I thought MM was mostly full of it. MM thinks very
highly of himself and I would be supprised if he had many "real" freinds. My
guess is that MM lives in a virtual world with little social interaction out of
it.
>
> Social Engineering my foot. If that was what MM was up to, it has no place
> here. But I don't think it was, I think it was just another layer of
> deception. This guy is amazingly deep and amazingly twisted.
I also mentioned to Todd that I thought MM seemed to contradict himself
regularly and seemed to have hugh emotional swings. I wouldn't be supprised if
MM had some sort of schizophrenic or multiple personality disorder
(Unfortunately I have a fair amount of family experiance with this). Of course
that is an assumption on my part and I am not a doctor but it is clear MM has
some real problems.
>
> Now, I do think that helping people out with things like spelling hygiene and
> how to ask questions and where stuff is and so forth is worthy and could
> possibly be construed as SE. But I don't think it is. If it was I'd be against
> it and I'm not so it must not be. :-)
Well personally I could care less about spelling as long as it is just a word
here or there. Actually I got pretty peeved once when someone E-mailed me
correcting my spelling, I didn't do anything about it but I was peeved.
If all SE was for was to make someone look at something through a different set
of eyes then I am for it. Knowing and understanding different philosophies is
a good thing, forcing your views on someone is not.
Anyway when all is said and done I think MM was only trying to disrupt and
cause chaos with no higher calling. Why he would want to do this in the LEGO
community I don't know but to each their own. I never responded directly to
any of MM's posts becuase I didn't want to give him any added satisfaction. I
did respond to other posts when I thought they were misguided but that is
because I do feel that sometimes we are a little to nice and accepting here. I
think we could all use a look in the mirror occasionally because that will help
us become better as a community. Constant praise usually doesn't lead to
advancement, a little self examination and healthy debating does.
So maybe in the future we can be a tad more critical but of course in a nice
way. I know I often ask for feedback here both positive and negative (in a
constructive sense) and to tell you the truth I learn more from the
critical/constructive posts then the posts of praise. I also don't get
offended by critical posts which might be a problem for some so maybe this is
not a good approach for all.
>
> Sorry for that, it sounded funny when I typed it. But my UK flight is about to
> be called so I gotta be terse.
Thats OK lots of what you write here I find funny and terse. ;-)
Eric Kingsley
The New England LEGO Users Group
http://www.nelug.org/
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Eric Kingsley writes:
> Lar said:
> > Now, I do think that helping people out with things like spelling hygiene and
> > how to ask questions and where stuff is and so forth is worthy and could
> > possibly be construed as SE. But I don't think it is. If it was I'd be
> > against it and I'm not so it must not be. :-)
>
> Well personally I could care less about spelling as long as it is just a word
> here or there. Actually I got pretty peeved once when someone E-mailed me
> correcting my spelling, I didn't do anything about it but I was peeved.
>
> If all SE was for was to make someone look at something through a different • set
> of eyes then I am for it. Knowing and understanding different philosophies is
> a good thing, forcing your views on someone is not.
Check. Walk a mile in the other man's shoes and all that.
> Anyway when all is said and done I think MM was only trying to disrupt and
> cause chaos with no higher calling. Why he would want to do this in the LEGO
> community I don't know but to each their own. I never responded directly to
> any of MM's posts becuase I didn't want to give him any added satisfaction. I
> did respond to other posts when I thought they were misguided but that is
> because I do feel that sometimes we are a little to nice and accepting here.
C/becuase/because/
C/to nice and/too nice and/
<GRIN>
Seriously, without starting a big war, I think most of us know that you're a
bit spelling challenged, Eric. And we love you nonetheless. Having said that,
I do think that sloppy penmanship leads to poor marks. While there are reasons
why people may not be able to spell words, punctuate clauses, structure
sentences, and so forth correctly, it does detract, especially on first
impression.
People get past that, if there is merit behind the errors. And perfectly
formed fluff is still fluff nonetheless. But you know what I mean.
> So maybe in the future we can be a tad more critical but of course in a nice
> way. I know I often ask for feedback here both positive and negative (in a
> constructive sense) and to tell you the truth I learn more from the
> critical/constructive posts then the posts of praise. I also don't get
> offended by critical posts which might be a problem for some so maybe this is
> not a good approach for all.
Check. I don't want slavering "wow that was good" posts any more than I
want "wow that sucked" posts. The best posts are the kind like "nice, but why
did you...? did you try ... instead?" and like "wow, neat effect, can you tell
us more about how you...?"
Just repeating what we all already know, no doubt.
Still up, unless you count plane sleep, from when I typed the post you're
responding too, but about to call it a day.
++Lar
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
<snip>
> C/becuase/because/
> C/to nice and/too nice and/
>
> <GRIN>
>
> Seriously, without starting a big war, I think most of us know that you're a
> bit spelling challenged, Eric.
You want a war I'll give you a war... ;-).
I don't pretend to be a good speller, I'm no good at the gramma stuff neither
;-). Never have been and probably never will be. I do try and spell check
words that I trully don't know but seeing I use the web interface many typo's
get through along with some misspelling when I am lazy.
It's not something I am proud of but, I am not ashamed of it either. I will
admit that in my professional life I am much more careful but still not perfect
by any means. I guess thats why I just design and code and leave documentation
up to someone else.
> And we love you nonetheless.
Gee thanks!
> Having said that,
> I do think that sloppy penmanship leads to poor marks. While there are reasons
> why people may not be able to spell words, punctuate clauses, structure
> sentences, and so forth correctly, it does detract, especially on first
> impression.
In general I agree but right now I have enough stress in my life to worry to
much about my penmanship on LUGNET. I try the best I can (which isn't really
that good) but if I make a mistake I don't fret to long about it.
>
> People get past that, if there is merit behind the errors. And perfectly
> formed fluff is still fluff nonetheless. But you know what I mean.
Very true.
> Still up, unless you count plane sleep, from when I typed the post you're
> responding too, but about to call it a day.
Well I have flown enough to know that plane sleep does not count. So good
night and rest well.
Eric Kingsley
The New England LEGO Users Group
http://www.nelug.org/
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Eric Kingsley writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > Seriously, without starting a big war, I think most of us know that you're a
> > bit spelling challenged, Eric.
I meant that in the nicest way, of course.
> You want a war I'll give you a war... ;-).
I think you left a comma out of that sentence fragment, big fella. :-)
All (1) kidding aside (I should have set followups to .fun on the last post
but they're set there now), I think if you don't want to be perfect in your
posts (not everyone can be me, after all (1)) you shouldn't have to be! This
is, afer all, a place to relax and have fun.
Everyone has to come to terms with the level they want to achieve in their
presentation, and what one sets as a standard for work may well be different
than when one is among friends, like here, especially when one is being
colloquial.
> I guess thats why I just design and code and leave documentation
> up to someone else.
Now that's scary! Programmers should document their own code, how can anyone
else know what it does? :-)
> > Still up, unless you count plane sleep, from when I typed the post you're
> > responding too, but about to call it a day.
I put a deliberate error in there for you to pounce on so you wouldn't feel
left out, but you missed it. :-)
1 - ok, most
++Lar
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Eric Kingsley writes:
> > I guess thats why I just design and code and leave documentation
> > up to someone else.
>
> Now that's scary! Programmers should document their own code, how can anyone
> else know what it does? :-)
Well I think you probably knew what I meant in that I leave final documentation
to someone else, i.e. the copy the customer sees, I have to document my code
for internal purposes of course.
>
> > > Still up, unless you count plane sleep, from when I typed the post you're
> > > responding too, but about to call it a day.
>
> I put a deliberate error in there for you to pounce on so you wouldn't feel
> left out, but you missed it. :-)
Well I am not sure but I think it was the "too". Ah the great English
language. We have to, too, and two and their, there, and they're the plural of
goose is geese but moose ain't meese. How anyone learning English as a second
language can ever figure it out I don't know. Heck I can't figure it out
sometimes.
Eric Kingsley
The New England LEGO Users Group
http://www.nelug.org/
|
|
|
