Subject:
|
Re: Social Engineering (was: Re: The Friendliest Site On The Internet. (Was Re: A little self examination?))
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:57:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
565 times
|
| |
|
|
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
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
67 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
