
“This guy’s arrogance takes your breath away” – Jiahao Chen - furcyd
https://medium.com/@acidflask/this-guys-arrogance-takes-your-breath-away-5b903624ca5f
======
tabtab
I'd like some feedback on why I got such a rotten score for mentioning the
orange guy below? It's not even necessarily negative criticism; it's about
relativism and to not let certain traits bother you. (Whether he has _other_
traits that may be disagreeable was not addressed and not intended to be.)

Please don't negate people without giving practical and applicable feedback. I
find hit-and-run negating really annoying and unhelpful, people. Use the minus
responsibly. I WANT to learn from my mistakes without having to avoid
controversial topics merely because they are controversial.

------
ConcernedCoder
I've just expanded my vocabulary by 5 words, while reading the 1st page of
correspondence: [https://github.com/jiahao/backus-dijkstra-
letters-1979/blob/...](https://github.com/jiahao/backus-dijkstra-
letters-1979/blob/master/text/1979-03-28-backus.txt)

I'm in awe.

------
ppseafield
This is some high level narcissist tactics.

> I trust that the above quotation from my letter explains what EWD692was: a
> political pamphlet where a political pamphlet seemed needed, a need that, I
> hope unintentionally, you yourself had created . My guess is that,had you
> fully realized the glamour of the Turing Lecture — and the lack of
> independent judgement of most of its audience — you had made more sober use
> of your eloquence.

> You raise the question why I did not send you a copy. Of course I thought
> about it. I can reassure you that it was not that I was “too embarrassed”.
> Well, you have given the answer yourself on page 4 of your letter “Perhaps
> the worst aspects of an emotional attack such as EWD692 is that it tends to
> cut off technical communication.” Between you and me I definitely prefer to
> discuss on the technical level our subject deserves. So, why polute it by
> politics?

In the first paragraph he states the need for a political call to action to
prevent the spread of the content of Backus's lecture to the completely
helpless and ignorant Turing Lecture audience, and also attributes anyone's
belief in it to - only - rhetorical power.

In the next paragraph (these were right next to each other!), he claims that
HIS OWN PAMPHLET was based in rhetoric because it was necessary, quotes
Backus's own point that Djikstra's very own tendencies tend to shut down
technical communication in order to claim that Backus had created the reason
for Djikstra not coming to him in the first place!

> I am unaware of any “need to be at stage center”, on the contrary! The vast
> majority of invitations to speak I decline, almost none of my writings are
> submitted for publication , and I send my writings to about a dozen
> people.Does that reveal “a need to be at stage center”? I don’t think so.

"I don't need to feel popular. I am constantly bombarded by people to come
speak at events, but I usually decline them. See?"

> Furthermore you need not worry about my “ego”; in large parts of my country
> the “ego” is considered as a not very helpful invention of the psychologists
> and we very much doubt whether it makes much sense to have one:
> “explanation” of people’s behaviour in terms of it is seldomly inspiring.

"We don't have egos in the Netherlands," and therefore you must be under some
misunderstanding created by your country's culture instead.

> thank you very much for your — also nice ! —

Remind you of anyone? Sad!

> You write “What am I to make of this response? “ Can I help you by stressing
> that I make a great difference be tween “your work” and “your Turing
> lecture”? I regard — and continue to regard — your work (as I wrote) as “a
> valid research effort”.

Your work is great! Except for the awful "Turing Lecture" you gave.

At the end of the last letter from Backus:

> In closing, let me say that I appreciated your last letter.

And that's all. Know where to pick your battles!

~~~
heyjudy
Yes. At a meta-level, it's dripping with contempt, judgement, criticism and
antagonism to an extreme degree, plus combative use of redundant personal
pronouns to drive a wedge of distance further between parties. "Refuse to
allow this type of behavior when it happens or avoid such sources of drama,
manipulation and abuse sooner" would be my humble recommendation if I had two
cents to chip in.

