[Cialug] Wow.

[Morris Dovey]

Jeff Davis wrote:
> 
> Morris Dovey wrote:
>> I reluctantly agree, as some readers may be young and impressionable,
>> still lacking the experience and knowledge that would allow them to
>> exercise capable judgment and rational discretion between intended
>> humor and serious declamation.
>>
> Intended humor can still be offensive. e.g. I could tell a racist joke
> and intend humor while still being offensive.

True - a valid point. If you do that (or something comparable) I might
wake up and let you know that I found it offensive. It'd be arrogant of
me to stand in judgment of your PCness.

> Also email is not a very effective medium for communicating sarcasm,
> which is often used in a humorous context.

Agreed. My solution is to try to remain alert to the possibility of
humor and/or sarcasm. It's not a 100% solution, but it seems to work
most of the time.

>> It is, of course, extraordinarily difficult to engage with nearly any
>> sizable group of people without rubbing /someone's/ fur the wrong way
>> on /some/ subject. The vi/emacs holy wars are a prime historical
>> example of the idiocy of blind polarization. Fortunately, most of the
>> participants survived, matured, and moved on to more productive
>> discourse.
>>
> I somewhat disagree.  As in this case the audience has a common
> interest.  Personally I would not be offended by anyone's stance on
> given platform, utility, or programming language.  Especially since such
> things are intended to be discussed within the context of the group.  In
> this case I wasn't as offended by the comment, so much as the disregard
> of the etiquette of the forum.

Aaah - I misinterpreted your response as an objection to the specifics
of the political reference rather than to the more general inclusion of
political subject matter.

>> Five decades of software/silicon/mechanical development have convinced
>> me that if Patty's employers allow her to hire on any basis other than
>> the best-available expertise to get the work done, then the
>> candidate's interests will be better-served elsewhere. It's that
>> simple - and yes, it does require the exercise of a certain amount of
>> courage.
>>
> I used to think that as well.  However, I have seen where someone may be
> very strong technically, but lack in communication and interpersonal
> skills that cause severe problems in business.  These types of issues
> become worse if the person is in a management position.  So if the
> person throws a project off the timeline because they can't communicate
> well and/or work with other team members, pisses off customers, or has a
> pattern of poor judgement with co-workers that ends up with HR being
> involved, then those things are very much relevant.

Yuppers. Putting such people in management positions /is/ damaging, and
is indicative of already seriously-flawed management higher up the
chain. At the design/implementation level, though, my personal
preference is for putting up with the all the possible wartiness of
truly competent people over trying to carry/drag even the most amiable
incompetents to project success - probably a result of spending most of
my career developing "mission critical" systems (one of which, TIROS-N,
is now in its fourth decade of [please pardon the pun] uptime).

> Personally, I'm pretty laid back and rarely offended.  I was just hoping
> to point poor Todd in a better direction.  We all make mistakes and I would
> be very hesitate to judge anyone on a single act.

Sounds good to me.

Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: mrdovey.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 22 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://cialug.org/pipermail/cialug/attachments/20090822/652fe301/attachment-0001.vcf