For those of you who consider mr wasser automatic for flames, think of
the time when you were "young and foolish".
I don't like what you are implying here. You are suggesting that we all
once behaved like Wassercrats. Could you either backup your claim with
references (the Internet has a good memory) or retract your words?
I know the young part is a compliment Wassercrats.
"compliment"? Do you mean "competent"? I don't know Wassercrats age, nor do
I think that matters. I don't discriminate, and I don't think "older" people
should be judged differently than "younger" people. As for Wassercrats being
competent - perhaps he is. However, I don't recall any post of him suggesting
he is. All I remember are posts of him attracking a lot downvotes. I haven't
decided yet whether he's a troll or just a sad case.
But he brought up a valid point using some statistics.
He did? He brought up a point? What point did he bring up?
His analysis is shallow to say the least, and I'd consider
it not-read-into-enough. Too simplistic. But that gives NONE of you the
right to treat him less than a human being.
Who did? Did anyone call him names? Please don't accuse people without
being specific. Give us names and quotes. I reread the thread, and I
don't see anyone treating him as "less than a human being".
And I've told him before, you should at least
consider what people say, but if he doesn't want to do certain things,
that's his will.
Yes, but if he doesn't like how people react on what he's saying, he
shouldn't voice his opinion. Freedom of speech works both ways.
The only outcome is possibly bad code.
The only Perl code posted in this thread was mine. Could you elaborate on
why you consider that "bad code"?
So to you who have begged him to leave, what makes you any better that
you should stay here yourselves?
I can think of a couple of reasons. Perhaps the most important reason is
that those who begged him to leave don't post articles with sentences
like
I might consider switching to another language if this trend
persists.
Are you too good to teach others the errors in their ways?
Now I am confused. First you critize us from writing replies to the
"young and foolish" Wassercrats - yet you expect us to teach him
his errors. Do you expect us to visit him in person?
Do you not know how to properly refute an argument?
I think that before anyone can refute
an argument, there should be an argument in the first place. I think the
thread was like this:
- Wassercrats composes some statistics.
- Wassercrats might consider switching to a different language because
of the statistics.
- People said "fine with us".
What do you expect people to say?
No, please, don't do that?
Didn't you say about him
if he doesn't want to do certain things,
that's his will? If he doesn't want to program in Perl, isn't it your
own idea that it's his will he shouldn't?
Do you not know how to interact with the community?
Have you stopped beating your wife?
At least wassercrats has the due dilligence to try and makes some sense of
things. It's not always right, but he tries.
He can try to make all the sense he wants. But anyone who posts here, or
elsewhere on a more or less public forum should expect people react to
their postings. If they can't stand that,
then don't post
publicly.
And that's certainly worth a lot more than your unneeded flames.
Djee, what a good last sentence of a post that's mostly a flame.
Abigail