Downvotes for disagreement and downvotes for non-constructiveness are sometimes hard to distinguish.
Downvotes for disagreement and downvotes for non-constructiveness are sometimes hard to distinguish. At the most obvious, a comment saying justt "I think you're wrong" clearly expresses a position that at least one person disagrees with, but is also almost certainly non-constructive, and potentially abusive in the form of being disrespectful. If you have arguments, make them. If the person you're arguing with made an argument, give the phrasing of the argument the benefit of the doubt, and engage with it as if it is a serious argument. (And if there's no way to do that, then their comment should be downvoted, because it's non-constructive.) To do otherwise is disrespectful of the person you're replying to, as well as to the community of people reading comments. A lot of times I see people making repetitive and poorly-informed comments that also happen to be disagreeable on the merits. They're relevant, they toe the line of "non-abusive", but they don't belong. For instance, a recent comment thread had someone asking about whether Microsoft accepts pull requests on GitHub. It got two replies: one person explaining that they were aiming to, and one person saying that, of course MS would never do such a thing. The latter comment got downvoted a fair bit. I'd imagine most of the people downvoting disagreed on the facts, since the comment happened to be wrong. But it also did not contribute to the discussion, since it was made out of ignorance and assumption, and rightly got downvoted on those grounds.
Posted by geofft on Apr 21, 2015, 6:05 AM
Tags
Related issues
- C++ is the "just here to deliver" language.
- He is not weirdly political, he has just more normal views, I know that is something hard to grasp for some tech bro.
- Of course you don't have a right to murder anyone.
- Unify Control and Container nodes, allow children to pick the behavior
- I was talking about this the other day with someone - broadly I agree with this, they're absolutely fantastic for getting a prototype so ...
- In theory you could express most things as a flowchart but the complexity of doing that quickly escalates.
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.7,000 issues0 comments
ux (EdTech)
C++ is the "just here to deliver" language.
He is not weirdly political, he has just more normal views, I know that is something hard to grasp for some tech bro.
Of course you don't have a right to murder anyone.
Unify Control and Container nodes, allow children to pick the behavior
I was talking about this the other day with someone - broadly I agree with this, they're absolutely fantastic for getting a prototype so ...
In theory you could express most things as a flowchart but the complexity of doing that quickly escalates.
It's not really hard to onboard new engineers with Scala, Clojure or even Ruby backgrounds.
Very understanding (or even no) partners is probably a large percentage of it!
Downvotes for disagreement and downvotes for non-constructiveness are sometimes hard to distinguish.
Downvotes for disagreement and downvotes for non-constructiveness are sometimes hard to distinguish. At the most obvious, a comment saying justt "I think you're wrong" clearly expresses a position that at least one person disagrees with, but is also almost certainly non-constructive, and potentially abusive in the form of being disrespectful. If you have arguments, make them. If the person you're arguing with made an argument, give the phrasing of the argument the benefit of the doubt, and engage with it as if it is a serious argument. (And if there's no way to do that, then their comment should be downvoted, because it's non-constructive.) To do otherwise is disrespectful of the person you're replying to, as well as to the community of people reading comments. A lot of times I see people making repetitive and poorly-informed comments that also happen to be disagreeable on the merits. They're relevant, they toe the line of "non-abusive", but they don't belong. For instance, a recent comment thread had someone asking about whether Microsoft accepts pull requests on GitHub. It got two replies: one person explaining that they were aiming to, and one person saying that, of course MS would never do such a thing. The latter comment got downvoted a fair bit. I'd imagine most of the people downvoting disagreed on the facts, since the comment happened to be wrong. But it also did not contribute to the discussion, since it was made out of ignorance and assumption, and rightly got downvoted on those grounds.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.