There's a chance this comment is what the user would have described as an incoherent but outright attack.
The user was claiming they didn't really understand the terminology but seemed to be trying their best when asked of another user to elucidate. You led with calling them dishonest.
You then said they were functionally MAGA and brought up some presumably racist German dude that I suspect few of us know about. You then had a diatribe on some view that had never been brought up in this thread and are now somehow discussing local governmental policies and propaganda.
I have no clue what I just read or how it connects to the post they made. I've tried to read in best effort but as best I can tell you maybe responded to the wrong person.
Asking out of good faith here. Isn't this essentially arguing the broken window theory?
> The broken windows theory is a criminological theory that states that visible signs of crime, anti-social behavior, and civil disorder create an urban environment that encourages further crime and disorder, including serious crimes. The theory suggests that policing methods that target minor crimes such as vandalism, public drinking, and fare evasion help to create an atmosphere of order and lawfulness, thereby preventing more serious crimes.
Perhaps there are two interpretations of this. 1. That it's a meaningless first step or 2. That it is a small but meaningful first step. To those who see (1), I think this is akin to heavily policing a neighborhood and arresting people for talking too loudly.
> The M&Ms provision was included in Van Halen’s contracts not as an act of caprice, but because it served a practical purpose: to provide a simple way of determining whether the technical specifications of the contract had been thoroughly read and complied with.
Or is it arguing the canary in the coal mine (a sentinel species which is affected by too-high carbon monoxide levels before humans are, giving miners a warning signal)?
Personally, I don't think the BWT analogy is the right one given how BWT is so strongly coupled to funding the police - even in its original non-zero tolerance version - and the well-known racism in its real-world application in NYC. You can see from your quote the lack of consideration of non-policing methods to target vandalism, public drinking and fare evasion.
Eg, pay for more sanitation and cleaning crews to fix vandalism, change the laws to keep cops from being the subsidized security force for abandoned buildings, restore public health services to help the homeless (one I've read about is to create supervised "flop house", that is, very cheap and basic housing where addicts and drunks have safer place to drink), and support mechanisms like raised minimum wages, increased unionization, or basic income which help people have the money to pay for the subway fare and an increased desire to maintain the current social system.
If anything, straight-out racism was replaced with passive aggression or non-textual harassment (i.e. intentionally throwing the game or screwing over your teammate)...
I'm not sure if I'd consider that a better player experience...
C# for everything side-projects here. It's the one language that I feel good for server-side backend, interactive desktop apps, and console apps with ease. It simply has awesome tooling and a sane standard library + language design that is incredibly expressive. I can get low-level if I'd like, which is awesome.
There are plenty of people who'd say frat culture undermines the productive capacity of the workplace, likewise with alcohol or being able to hit on others, or difficulties people have because hookup culture is now a thing. Both extremes of that are clearly terrible... there's really no right answer.
I don't disagree. My comment was specifically geared towards the comment thread calling out productive communication, and whether or not that's a valid characteristic of a desirable coworker (as well as the inverse).
The user was claiming they didn't really understand the terminology but seemed to be trying their best when asked of another user to elucidate. You led with calling them dishonest.
You then said they were functionally MAGA and brought up some presumably racist German dude that I suspect few of us know about. You then had a diatribe on some view that had never been brought up in this thread and are now somehow discussing local governmental policies and propaganda.
I have no clue what I just read or how it connects to the post they made. I've tried to read in best effort but as best I can tell you maybe responded to the wrong person.
reply