
Where’s _why? - ggualberto
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2012/03/ruby_ruby_on_rails_and__why_the_disappearance_of_one_of_the_world_s_most_beloved_computer_programmers_.html
======
raganwald
Let’s see now. The article spends pages talking about _why and the author’s
relationship with _why’s work. Great. It spends a page talking about _why’s
desire for anonymity and reclusive nature. Good. It talks about _why’s
“infosuicide” and notes that it happened shortly after he was “outed.” Fine.

And then we get paragraphs detailing how this journalist stalked him trying to
get him to comment about the article. Send an email or two, fine, but after
sending emails and leaving messages that were all unreturned, after leaving
messages with people who know the man behind the pseudonym which were ignored,
this journalist still had to track him down to where is is now working and try
to get through to talk to him.

Being a journalist does not give you a right to stalk people. You have no
special immunity to care and consideration for other people’s feelings. This
man is not some sort of villain on the run from the law, he’s a private
citizen who wishes to be be left alone, and this “journalist” admits to
flirting with the idea of showing up at his house after being repeatedly
refused contact.

I strongly disapprove of this conduct, it smacks of hubris to think that some
fleeting bit of text, written for the business purpose of getting eyeballs to
look at advertisements, is worth huntimg a man down and cornering him when he
does not want to be interviewed.

p.s. And regardless of how well the name of the man behind _why is or isn’t
known, I also disapprove of repeating it in the article, it was not necessary
to the story at all.

~~~
AnnieLowrey
Hi there, raganwald, Annie here. I think this is a completely valid criticism,
and it's one I largely expected. But for what it is worth, here are my
thoughts.

As a journalist, I think it would have been irresponsible not to inform _why
of the article and not to try to interview him. (As a general point, you don't
write articles about public figures, and he was absolutely a public figure,
without giving them the chance to respond.) I didn't expect him to get back to
me, and certainly did not stalk him. And my hope is that the article
approaches the infosuicide in the most humane way possible.

~~~
raganwald
_As a journalist, I think it would have been irresponsible not to inform _why
of the article and not to try to interview him._

Your repeated emails and messages left for him obviously informed him. We’ll
have to agree to disagree about what constitutes responsible journalism with
respect to “trying to interview him.”

Once he’s aware that you want to interview him and chooses not to respond, I’d
say you tried. Your actions seem to suggest that “responsible journalism”
consists of going further and pressing yourself on people who have already
made their feelings about the matter clear.

I don’t wish to single you out, so I will say the next thing in a general way.
I have trouble with flinging the words “public figure” around. There was a
man. He constructed a persona. That persona was public. The man was private.
The man worked very hard to separate the two. Compare and contrast to
hollywood stars of both sexes who practically invite the world into their
bedrooms.

I think reporting about _why is fair game, _why was a public figure. I think
hunting down the man who created _why is intrusive and is at the level of a
paparazzo, invading the privacy of a person who from the outset was clear
about separating the two.

I have a public persona, “raganwald.” I don’t try to hide the man Reg
Braithwaite behind the persona. But I don’t think that blogging or speaking at
conferences or commenting here somehow invites the world to call me at work if
I don’t answer emails, or to hunt down my cellphone records or to waylay me in
the street or to take pictures of my children. I am not a public figure in the
way that a politician is a public figure.

I likewise believe that the man behind _why is not a public figure. _why?
Public. Pictures of _why in character? Public. The man who walked away from
creating and maintaining _why? Entitled to privacy and to not worrying about
people calling him when he chooses to ignore their emails and entitled to have
his friends and associates left alone.

p.s. As I noted, however, I liked almost everything I read in the article.

~~~
ArtB
>"I think reporting about _why is fair game, _why was a public figure. I think
hunting down the man who created _why is intrusive and is at the level of a
paparazzo, invading the privacy of a person who from the outset was clear
about separating the two."

Sorry, but I find that rediculous. If Brian Warner kills someone, or James
Osterburg overdoses that is not appropriate for public news because they did
it under their private personas? Or can Brittney Spears claim that she has two
different personas that both just happen to be named "Brittney Spears"?

Frankly, as I see it, once you develop a reputation based on name in a wider
community you are now a public figure regardless under which persona you'd
like to hide.

~~~
icebraining
Killing someone is a very different issue - it's not a private matter, but a
public crime. But for the rest, why not? Why should one be forced to have his
life publicized just because he creates something that many people like?

You're essentially punishing people for doing good things. That feels very
wrong to me.

~~~
ArtB
You are not being punished even if you perceive as such. One could say that an
obese women that loses weight and gets in shaped gets punished because men hit
on her.

~~~
icebraining
If that hypothetical woman was getting hit by men after she made it clear that
she dislikes it, then I'd say it _is_ punishment. Well, not punishment
exactly, because that's a response to a behavior considered wrong, but in a
"no good deed goes unpunished" sense.

------
athst
This is a really great article. I didn't realize that Slate gave their
journalists a month out of every year to do something like this.

I think the description of her initially trying to learn ruby is really
instructive for everyone who wants more people to learn how to code. There are
just simple things you don't think about that a beginner can really get hung
up on. For example, why can't you enter code into a word processor? How do you
run scripts? I don't think programming books do a very good job of explaining
these types of things, even now. Zed Shaw's Learn X the Hard Way series is
probably the best at it I've seen so far.

~~~
zedshaw
One thing I do with my books is I actually meet up with beginners and watch
them try to use it. It seems every time I do that I find something new I
hadn't anticipated. Like recently I changed the first exercise of LPTHW to
have screenshots of what they will literally see:

<http://learnpythonthehardway.org/book/ex1.html>

I met with a beginner and watched her go through the first exercise, and she
didn't understand that she's needed to type "print" and not the line numbers.
I talked her through it then realized if I just show a screenshot then people
could step from literal thinking about the code blocks in the book to abstract
thinking in one exercise.

Same for the terminal/powershell screenshots. People didn't get that they just
type into powershell. They thought they had to run python, then type the
powershell commands into the python REPL.

Doing this kind of "usability study" on my books, and having the comments on
each exercise, has really taught me a lot.

~~~
Estragon
How do you meet people interested in doing this?

~~~
zedshaw
People email me sometimes or ask, sometimes I mention I'm looking for someone
on twitter. It's not as often as I'd like since I don't have a stable meeting
place and coffee shops sort of suck.

------
kabdib
I liked the article. I'm happy that _why didn't commit _real_ suicide. I will
now forget the name of the person that the journalist tracked down, and if I
ever meet the guy in person, I'll try not to know it.

~~~
glogla
I agree. Good thing he's okay.

------
shawnee_
_And _why himself thought of his [(poignant) guide to Ruby] as a literary
project. “The book I feel is closest to my book is The Curious Incident of the
Dog in the Night-Time, which interleaves brief math puzzles and astronomical
diagrams with the story,” he wrote to a listserv. “[I’m] interested in
presenting an initial stab at giving literary value to a programming text. I’m
also interested in getting people to at least feel what I feel when I
program.”_

Great quote. _why definitely created a new genre.

------
lubutu
I think there's a kind of agreement amongst those of us who look up to _why —
and we are not all Ruby programmers — that although it is quite easy to
discover _why's true identity, we'd rather just think of him as why the lucky
stiff. That said, when he disappeared I read chapter 6 of the Poignant Guide,
and his blog, and I feared the worst. When I looked into it and discovered
that he was still alive it made me feel a lot less worried. So I'm glad it's
made clear that he's really okay.

I'm less sure about broadcasting his real name, but it's been done before and
it'll be done again. To me he's just _why.

------
lectrick
There's a tremendous amount of pressure to becoming well-known. Musicians self
destruct under it. Movie stars' private lives blow up. I can totally
understand how a super talented but sensitive dude might want to maintain a
pseudonym to deflect this pressure.

While I still wish he were around (in a public sense), because he was a big
part of why I jumped into the Ruby community, I don't agree with hunting him
down. Ultimately he's a typical human being with some big talents and
shortcomings.

_why, if you're out there, thanks. Wish I could buy you a beer.

------
sunraa
On a slightly less controversial tangent, the author did a nice job explaining
getting up and running with her first program as well as explaining what
programming does. The comments at the article thus far are mainly from
programmers. It would be interesting to see how much non-technical folks take
away from it.

~~~
ttt_
Yes, I think it illustrates what I think is the actual steepest learning curve
to start programming and that's abstraction, to apply meaning to arbitrary
things. It's something we are not really used to learning in standard
education. Sure there's math, but most of the time it's taught by applying
some kind of method without most ever questioning further.

I think the best way to learn programming is by doing puzzles and logic mind-
benders. Get your brain used to abstract thinking and following logic, as well
as being rewarded for solving a difficult problem.

If you manage that, than programming becomes simply applying conventions
logically to solve problems (also prepare to be flooded with increasingly
higher level conventions).

------
sutro
The question that has nagged me more than "Where's _why?" is "Where's nickb?"
Did anyone ever find out?

~~~
tokenadult
_The question that has nagged me more than "Where's _why?" is "Where's nickb?"
Did anyone ever find out?_

Work your way up this thread

<http://hackerne.ws/item?id=152388>

from child comment to parent comment and see what you think.

See also

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=152428>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=292858>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=249499>

and other threads I found just by Googling the two usernames in question. I
don't claim to know the "official" correct answer to the question of what
happened to nickb, with whom I interacted mostly as co-founder of the former
New Mogul site, a website with HN's interface for business news.

~~~
sutro
I had seen all those previous threads except for raganwald's "Worse is Better"
link. I admit that link does make a decent case for the sock-puppet theory.
However, I still think that nickb was a real person. I was an avid reader of
New Mogul (great site, well done), and nickb's contributions there, as you
know, were very extensive. The sheer volume of Nick's combined activity on
both HN and NM casts doubt on the sock-puppet theory in my mind. Furthermore,
in addition to finance, Nick seemed genuinely interested in B2B enterprise
software sales strategy. I corresponded with him on email about that subject a
few times. If you follow PG you know that is a subject that he takes no
interest in and in fact encourages all the YC companies to eschew enterprise
sales. Also I remember someone during one of the "where's nickb" discussions
here or on NM around the time of his disappearance saying that he knew that
Nick lived in Ottawa and was going to try to check up on him in person. The
idea that Nick lived in Ottawa was corroborated by other comments that Nick or
others had made in the past...I believe he might have been a professor there.
Anyway my point is that there was so much effort behind nickb's contributions
and enough detailed differentiation between him and PG that if he were indeed
a sock-puppet the ruse would seem to go beyond being a joke and cross into the
realm of split-personality, and for me that is a bridge too far. Then again I
did always wonder why PG pulled him off of the leaders board after he
disappeared:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/leaders>

And as far as I remember PG never really commented on his disappearance.
Either way, sock-puppet or no, I would very much like to know the rest of the
story. Perhaps Ms Lowrey will one day solve the mystery for us.

~~~
sutro
FYI:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=775507>

------
sethetter
It's obvious that _why (before his disappearance) kept to this name, as
opposed to his real name, because he wanted to hold on to his privacy. Now
that he's relied on that to vanish and not be bothered, he's been found out
and I'm sure people are still bothering him. I feel sorry for the guy, he did
awesome things for the community, but everyone has a right to be left alone
should they so please. Let's keep remembering what he did for the community
and honor that, and him, by catering to his wishes of privacy and a peaceful
life.

------
yuvadam
This is pretty funny; there's been some talk on twitter this week that we
might have spotted _why @ PyCon 2012 [1].

[1] - <http://cl.ly/1O141o140c3T1E2G0w2U>

~~~
bobx11
Yep - I was there... it looked like him (after someone pointed it out to me of
course)

------
SarahKay
I have a theory about what motivated _why to quit. Partway through the article
it says that the name "_why" is a reference to The Fountainhead. (The precise
reference is here:
[http://books.google.com/books?id=3WiS2jWThFAC&lpg=PT133&...](http://books.google.com/books?id=3WiS2jWThFAC&lpg=PT133&dq=%22why%2C%20the%20lucky%20stiff%22&pg=PT133#v=onepage&q=%22why,%20the%20lucky%20stiff%22&f=false))
If he read that, maybe he also read Atlas Shrugged (also by Ayn Rand) -- a
story in which several successful and prolific characters "disappear" in
exactly this manner.

I won't spoil the plot for anybody who's planning to read it, since this
mystery is one of the main parts of the story, but this explanation sounds
pretty likely to me.

Here's the plot on Wikipedia, though it doesn't give a very good explanation
of why people choose to disappear:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_shrugged#Plot_summary>

~~~
philwelch
I've been an Randroid, and I"ve known a lot of Randroids, and _why never
struck me as the type.

~~~
i386
How so?

~~~
philwelch
For one, most Randroids won't shut up about it. For another, _why was just too
whimsical, postmodern, and nonlinear to be a Rand devotee.

~~~
sanderjd
You're painting pretty broadly with that stereotype brush. Books influence
people but are not the only influence on people. You have no idea which books
_why appreciates or the extent to which they have influenced his personality,
so stop guessing.

I _hate_ words like "Randroid", "Republitard", "Democrap", etc. regardless of
whether I agree or disagree with their connotation. They are the adult, but no
more mature, equivalent of the childhood poopypants slur - you are other so
you are bad.

~~~
philwelch
I used to be a Randroid myself--it's a surprisingly apt moniker, and when you
run into enough people on forums relentlessly parroting Rand's idiosyncratic
style of argumentation you'll see why.

I'm not ruling out the idea that _why may have read or appreciated Rand at
some point, I'm just ruling out the idea that she was a major influence. If
you understand Rand and you understand _why, you can see some very deep
philosophical differences.

~~~
sanderjd
You're conflating two groups with each other, one that is the larger group of
people who appreciate or have been influenced by Rand's work, and one that is
presumably a subset and is made up by people you have interacted with and
formed an impression of. This is how stereotypes work, you conflate a subset
of people that you have direct evidence of with the superset of people that
they are related to in some way. Just because I can't argue with the existence
of the subset in your evidence does not mean that your stereotype is not
ridiculous.

I don't claim that _why and Rand would agree with each other in a
philosophical discussion, but that is not proof that she had no influence on
him. Often what influences us most is that which forces us to think very hard
about why we disagree.

And everyone who uses those sorts of childish words believes them to be apt.
"But Republicans really _are_ retards". Please.

~~~
philwelch
I thought it was clear I _wasn't_ conflating the two groups, since I
explicitly said _why could easily be part of the larger group. In fact, I know
they are separate groups because at age 17 I was a Randroid and today I'm a
relatively sane human being who appreciates Rand's work.

------
trustfundbaby
I just don't see the point of finding his name, place of work and throwing
that in the article, when it was pretty clear that he wouldn't want that
information to be public. It doesn't really add anything to the article and it
just seems (to me) like it was done for no other reason than curry favor with
the hacker crowd.

Left a bad taste in my mouth.

------
sgentle
I thought this was a really great article. I remember _why's disappearance
with sadness, but even his info-immolation could take nothing away from how
much his work meant to me.

It was 2005 or so and I was at university, feeling a bit overwhelmed by
everything. Going from a high school where just knowing what a command prompt
is makes you the baddest dude in computer class to sitting in a lecture where
breadth-first search is assumed knowledge is... humbling, to say the least.

It was around that time that someone pointed me to Joel on Software, which was
bombshell number one. He wrote so beautifully about software and software
projects that I just read through his archives straight from start to finish
in a few days. He had positive things to say about Ruby, and mentioned _why's
poignant guide, so I gave it a look.

Bombshell number two was the poignant guide, or just Ruby itself, or maybe
both. In my memory, it's hard to disentangle the two, because _why was so much
a part of Ruby, and in so many ways a product of Ruby. I'd written C, and that
felt like being a badass basement-dwelling hacker, flipping bits by night and
making out with Angelina Jolie by day. With Perl I felt like some kind of
rambling longbearded wizard who could topple mountains if only he could get
his sigils sorted out.

But Ruby? Ruby felt like fun. It felt like: hey, relax, it's only programming,
you know? Code doesn't have to be for building bridges or hacking Gibsons; it
can be a craft, an art in itself. _why's guide was the distilled essence of
that message. Cartoon foxes, a soundtrack(!), and self-reference applied with
the subtlety of a child's fingerpaint. I loved every minute I spent with that
wonderful guide and its wonderful language.

So Ruby got popular and started to grow up. We got web frameworks, JIT
compilers and package managers. We got to be a ghetto for a while, which was
sort of a joke but not really. DHH swore at people and made 37 billion
dollars. Later on there was some stuff about porn stars but by then I wasn't
really paying attention.

I mainly write Node and Coffeescript now; they feel like successors to Ruby's
technical legacy but the culture's not the same. Maybe it's just that I'm
different now, or maybe the programming community's fallen hard for the Jobs
and forgotten the Woz. Still, every now and again I pull up irb and Project
Euler, foo.each-do-|bar| my way through a few problems for old times sake, and
a part of me relives that feeling of childlike joy.

Not many languages get to have their own Peter Pan, but Ruby had _why, and it
was better for it. A person, a language, and a community; none of them can
stay young forever. But a legend never ages, never goes into maintenance mode,
never gets buried neck-deep in strategy tax. I can't hate _why for info-dying
young and leaving a good looking cyber-corpse. The memory will stay with me
long after the code is irrelevant. So thanks, _why, if you're out there. And
thanks, Annie, for an article that did the memory justice.

------
zachinglis
Am I the only one to think that posts about _why is like writing a love letter
to the girlfriend who dumped you 3 years ago!?

It's a shame that he disappeared but that was 3 years ago. There are MANY an
amazing talent in the industry.

------
rargulati
By choosing not to respond, this may be a brilliant move on his end in making
"immortal" the persona _why (and keeping the fire hot). An article in slate,
followed by discussions in various communities such as Hacker News show that
he left on a high note and his persona still has a lot of "pull".

------
zecho
Does anyone else find the deletion of the infosuicide Wikipedia entry linked
to in the article as deliciously ironic as I do? Which is a bit sad, because
I'd never heard the term before, even though I have been online long enough to
participate in my own infosuicide from time to time.

------
DanBC
Internationally, and for many years, over many different survey bodies,
"reporter" turns up on the lists of "unpopular professions".

What is the public interest in giving his real name? What possible purpose
does it serve? I understand that the journalist wanted to give him the
opportunity to respond, but that's no reason to publish the name.

He made it very clear that he wanted to stay private. Until there's an
important reason to breach his privacy you should respect that.

------
csbartus
HN got so sick ... After reading the article I came over to see the comments
to get some more ... but found a totally different feeling.

That raganwald guy taking over such a rude way over a nice topic ....

Please take away all my karma, at least will worth it.

------
mathias
And where the fuck is Mark Pilgrim?

~~~
masklinn
I like to think he's on a beach on a remote indonesian island, drinking out of
a fresh coconut he just harvested, resting in the shade to the sound of the
waves rolling on the sand and the far away cries of the Gibbons and paradise
birds in the forest.

------
joshu
A master. Not just at his craft, but of his own story as well.

------
thought_alarm
I once joked that _why worked for an ASP.NET firm writing enterprisy
middleware, and his employment contract forbid him from participating from
open source projects, which is why he had to remain anonymous.

That now seems somewhat close to the truth.

Regardless, he obviously wanted to keep his _real_ life (and perhaps his
_real_ job) isolated from the _why persona, and there are all sorts of
perfectly legitimate and understandable reasons for wanting that separation.
If some jackass started stalking me in the way the _why was stalked, I would
be extremely pissed and would close up shop just like he did. Why that's so
difficult for some people to understand, I'll never know.

Anyway, I enjoyed the article and I think he gave the perfect response to the
reporter.

------
jpeterson
I find it highly likely that _why is still among us.

~~~
bcjordan
Looking in the source for the Slate article, secretly hoping the author might
have put sort of comment in for developers, I came across this:

    
    
      <!-- CHUNKY BUTTONS -->
      <!-- CHUNKY BUTTONS -->

------
goldmab
My favorite part was this analogy by Guido van Rossum:

 _In Python, I would just say something like, ‘Get up and go through the
door.’ In other languages, I might have to say something like, ‘Stand up, but
not with so much force that you fall over, take three steps to the north, take
one step to the east, approach the door, check that it is open, if it is not
open, open it, then step through it with this amount of speed …’_

------
negw
Loved the article.

I would like to say only one thing: once you know _why's way of thinking and
artsy way of hacking, calling him a sloppy programmer is unfair and frankly a
little bit dumb.

He was a great programmer, he just didn't follow common wisdom, probably
because the reasons behind his work were very different from ours.

------
djhworld
I enjoyed this article to be honest, I haven't written any Ruby in a while but
it was nice to get a history of the language interspersed with the enigma that
is _why.

Could have done without the "journalist trying to learn to program" bits
though

------
eberfreitas
This article reminded me of this J.J. Abrams' talk at TED -
<http://www.ted.com/talks/j_j_abrams_mystery_box.html>

------
flocial
I think the main thing that scares me about this is how just being a prominent
(in terms of garnering attention) open-source hacker seems to give people the
right to pry into your privacy and reveal your personal information to the
world.

It's ironic that in _why's quest to disappear he permanently implanted his
real identity in web folklore instead of quietly fading away.

------
NARKOZ
<http://viewsourcecode.org/why/index.html>

------
bitsoda
His band's album is pretty damn good if you're into indie rock. Give it a
listen. [http://www.amazon.com/In-the-Faxed-
Atmosphere/dp/B0013M9ZS2/...](http://www.amazon.com/In-the-Faxed-
Atmosphere/dp/B0013M9ZS2/ref=sr_shvl_album_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1331878903&sr=301-1)

------
steve-howard
Has anyone checked int __cdecl why(); ?

------
ph0rque
I know this is a bit offtopic, but does anyone else get a 404 when you try to
readability the article?

------
ramblerman
The link on John Resig's tribute led me to a song written by _why
<http://goo.gl/xvAM5>

I had no idea he was that good musically too. It's a bit quirky, but it really
does show that he was an artistic soul above anything else.

------
rbanffy
It's fun to read it right now, for I'm sitting near the gates at SJC airport,
a fresh PyCon behind me, waiting my flight to Salt Lake City.

I wish I had the kind of impact he did. It's nice to have role models, even if
being one of them is not.

:-)

:-)

------
chunkybacon
<<Third, Rubyists possess an often exaggerated, yet nevertheless merited,
reputation for being the quirky hug-everyone kids of the programming world.
Their motto is MINSWAN, or Matz Is Nice So We Are Nice, a reference to the
language’s legendarily sweet founder, Yukihiro Matsumoto, nom d’Internet Matz.
We might just all get along.>>

For real? Most Rubyists I meet these days are annoying hipster types that I
want to smash with their skateboard (yes, yes, I'm huge _why fanboy).

~~~
krunaldo
The ruby community is awesome, the rails community less so.

------
KVFinn
Happy to know that _why's alive and kicking somewhere. I hope he didn't quit
out of sadness.

------
ozataman
Matz dreamed Ruby up during Dreamforce "Cloud Computing" conference in 1993???
In 1993?

~~~
jdminhbg
No, he told the story of coming up with Ruby in 1993 during a Dreamforce
conference presumably in 2011/2.

~~~
ozataman
Hah! That makes more sense :)

------
thomasfl
TL;DR "Jonathan [Gillette] is _why, he is fine, and he just wants to be left
alone."

------
lightyrs
Welcome to the future. Programmers are the new musicians.

------
H_E_Pennypacker
Link is broken. Any explanation of the article?

~~~
jmcqk6
The author gives the background of _why, including apparently outing his
actual identity and current city of residence.

The author also discusses his own experiences trying to learn programming and
specifically ruby. I found this part interesting, because neither the pickaxe
book or _why's poignant guide did very much for him, but tryruby.org did seem
to help.

While I'm uncomfortable with the fact that they outed _why, the article is
pretty interesting to see the non-programmer / beginning programmer
perspective in all this. To be fair to the author, apparently _why's identity
has already well established in the ruby community.

~~~
Kiro
(s/his/her)

------
user2459
Personally I think _why's largest contribution to programming(or even culture)
wasn't inspiring people to program. It was inspiring people to teach. We read
his book and saw that teaching itself could be fun, wacky, and rewarding and
it stoked a fire in lots of us to turn ourselves into educational magicians.

------
funkah
He's out there somewhere making an AMAZING coding tutorial starring two really
cool-looking shoes who hang out with each other and crack hilarious jokes.

------
sktrdie
Where's _how?

------
dustineichler
I read this with interest. I don't want to bs you about that. I'd even go so
far as to say this is an article your girlfriend or boyfriend should read...
BUT what this journalist; would be programmer did for the record is the
equivalent of coming into my home and pooping on the floor. THAT, I can not
abide. My personal rule of thumb when learning anything new... LOOK AND
LISTEN.

~~~
dustineichler
It's down vote(s) like this on an otherwise benign comment that drives me to
remove myself from the community... much like the subject of the article.

