5 ms·

Yep, still a work in progress. Ex 27 is where they switch to learning logic, so I laid a marker there to work toward. It's not really patronizing so much as "

by zedshaw 17y ago

Yep, still a work in progress. Ex 27 is where they switch to learning logic, so I laid a marker there to work toward. It's not really patronizing so much as "gentle" to non-programmers. I do however poke fun at programmers because non-programmers have some odd beliefs about coders being these gods that they aren't. By cracking little jokes are programmers I'm hoping to get them over this fear.

gte910h 17y ago
Oh hi there, forgot this is a small world we're in and you might actually read my comment. You're a good writer most of the time, however, I believe you're trying to use a certain style here, and that style may not be appropriate for this type of work if you are aiming at adults and children both; it is appropriate for a children's book though. The patronizing part wasn't the non-programmer part and making fun of programmers. I actually loved the line about VI/Emacs. It was the overly simplified sentences. Let me dig the pdf out: You can print things out with print and you can do math. The next step is to learn about variables. In programming a variable is nothing more than a name for something so you can use the name rather than the something as you code. Programmers use these variable names to make their code read more like English, and because programmers have a lousy ability to remember things. If they didn’t use good names for things in their software they’d get lost when they came back and tried to read their code again. For instance in this section your actual sentences are very simple. Over and over you use these simple sentences. And you use an explicit "you". It gives the feel of a children's book (I don't know if you have kids, but if not, google for some of the books or ask a co-worker to borrow some). I think explicit "you" is fine, but the constant reassurance compounded with the sentence structure and explicit "you" feels patronizing. Other examples: You might not know it, but every time you put " (double-quotes) around a piece of text you’ve been making a string. Most of these concepts will be exciting once you get them. You’ll struggle with them, like wrestling a squid, then one day snap you’ll understand it. I know several people professionally who'd benefit from the book if you upped the "implicit respect" of the style a few notches. However, I'd be afraid to give it to a few of them out of fear of insulting them with the way some people will interpret the tone. I'm putting this out there in all earnestness. Here are a couple books on two different styles which might be more applicable for the work. They are on actual explicit styles of writing, although the second pretends all writing should look like that. Clear and Simple as the Truth by Thomas & Turner (Classic style). Nonafflink: http://www.amazon.com/Clear-Simple-As-Truth-Writing/dp/0691029172/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1272401038&sr=8-1 http://www.amazon.com/Clear-Simple-As-Truth-Writing/dp/06910... Example of classic style: When I was a boy, there was but one permanent ambition among my comrades in our village footnote [1. Hannibal, Missouri] on the west bank of the Mississippi River. That was, to be a steamboatman. We had transient ambitions of other sorts, but they were only transient. When a circus came and went, it left us all burning to become clowns; .... now and then we had a hope that if we lived and were good, God would permit us to be pirates. These ambitions faded out, each in its turn; but the ambition to be a steamboatman always remained. --Mark Twain Style by Williams (Plain Style): Nonafflink: http://www.amazon.com/Style-Clarity-Chicago-Writing-Publishing/dp/0226899152/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1272401237&sr=8-1 http://www.amazon.com/Style-Clarity-Chicago-Writing-Publishi... Example: After Peter the Great died, seven out of eight reigns of the Romanov line were plagued by turmoil over disputed succession to the throne. -- Williams edit to uncredited work on Russia
- zedshaw 17y ago
  That's only patronizing if you take yourself too seriously. Otherwise it's just direct and simple. That makes it easier to read and makes sure that the prose doesn't make things seem more complex than they actually are. Another way to put that is the complexity/simplicity of the prose attempts to match the complexity/simplicity of the exercise.
  - gte910h 17y ago
    It's not me I'm worried about it coming off as patronizing to. I'm worried about people I might recommend it to (and thereby seem patronizing myself). With the current style, I'd probably only recommend it to kids and a couple adults I know very very well. Encouragement and assuming the user only knows what you have told them (which you do in a few places) are the things that don't come off as "adult literature". Hell, a couple teens I know would feel patronized by that, and teens definitely take themselves seriously. The short sentence structure is only the biggest of deal because of the other two facets. You could keep your grade 6 FKA score but ditch the other two parts of the style. As the tone is now, I'm pretty sure they'd take me handing this to them worse than a X for dummies book.
    - Radix 17y ago
      Why can't you simply deride the language while praising the approach. Then the adult can believe you aren't being patronizing, maybe the book is, but the book is an effective way to learn. The teenagers can run through it in a short time (or read through it if they should be reading another book), and the adults will be fine. Have you heard how many adults say "oh I'm not very good with computers"? What's there to be good with? Not that the book is worth derision, just as a tactic for those who take themselves too seriously.
      - gte910h 17y ago
        As I said before: >It's not me I'm worried about it coming off as patronizing to. I know Zed's history. I'm not going to have issues using the book. But random non-programmers don't. And those are the people I'd hand the book to. I've got a thicker skin than some of them, and wouldn't care about the tone of the tome even if he directly insulted me. But THEY would. That's the issue.

by zedshaw 17y ago

gte910h 17y ago

Oh hi there, forgot this is a small world we're in and you might actually read my comment. You're a good writer most of the time, however, I believe you're trying to use a certain style here, and that style may not be appropriate for this type of work if you are aiming at adults and children both; it is appropriate for a children's book though. The patronizing part wasn't the non-programmer part and making fun of programmers. I actually loved the line about VI/Emacs. It was the overly simplified sentences. Let me dig the pdf out: You can print things out with print and you can do math. The next step is to learn about variables. In programming a variable is nothing more than a name for something so you can use the name rather than the something as you code. Programmers use these variable names to make their code read more like English, and because programmers have a lousy ability to remember things. If they didn’t use good names for things in their software they’d get lost when they came back and tried to read their code again. For instance in this section your actual sentences are very simple. Over and over you use these simple sentences. And you use an explicit "you". It gives the feel of a children's book (I don't know if you have kids, but if not, google for some of the books or ask a co-worker to borrow some). I think explicit "you" is fine, but the constant reassurance compounded with the sentence structure and explicit "you" feels patronizing. Other examples: You might not know it, but every time you put " (double-quotes) around a piece of text you’ve been making a string. Most of these concepts will be exciting once you get them. You’ll struggle with them, like wrestling a squid, then one day snap you’ll understand it. I know several people professionally who'd benefit from the book if you upped the "implicit respect" of the style a few notches. However, I'd be afraid to give it to a few of them out of fear of insulting them with the way some people will interpret the tone. I'm putting this out there in all earnestness. Here are a couple books on two different styles which might be more applicable for the work. They are on actual explicit styles of writing, although the second pretends all writing should look like that. Clear and Simple as the Truth by Thomas & Turner (Classic style). Nonafflink: http://www.amazon.com/Clear-Simple-As-Truth-Writing/dp/0691029172/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1272401038&sr=8-1 http://www.amazon.com/Clear-Simple-As-Truth-Writing/dp/06910... Example of classic style: When I was a boy, there was but one permanent ambition among my comrades in our village footnote [1. Hannibal, Missouri] on the west bank of the Mississippi River. That was, to be a steamboatman. We had transient ambitions of other sorts, but they were only transient. When a circus came and went, it left us all burning to become clowns; .... now and then we had a hope that if we lived and were good, God would permit us to be pirates. These ambitions faded out, each in its turn; but the ambition to be a steamboatman always remained. --Mark Twain Style by Williams (Plain Style): Nonafflink: http://www.amazon.com/Style-Clarity-Chicago-Writing-Publishing/dp/0226899152/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1272401237&sr=8-1 http://www.amazon.com/Style-Clarity-Chicago-Writing-Publishi... Example: After Peter the Great died, seven out of eight reigns of the Romanov line were plagued by turmoil over disputed succession to the throne. -- Williams edit to uncredited work on Russia

zedshaw 17y ago
That's only patronizing if you take yourself too seriously. Otherwise it's just direct and simple. That makes it easier to read and makes sure that the prose doesn't make things seem more complex than they actually are. Another way to put that is the complexity/simplicity of the prose attempts to match the complexity/simplicity of the exercise.
- gte910h 17y ago
  It's not me I'm worried about it coming off as patronizing to. I'm worried about people I might recommend it to (and thereby seem patronizing myself). With the current style, I'd probably only recommend it to kids and a couple adults I know very very well. Encouragement and assuming the user only knows what you have told them (which you do in a few places) are the things that don't come off as "adult literature". Hell, a couple teens I know would feel patronized by that, and teens definitely take themselves seriously. The short sentence structure is only the biggest of deal because of the other two facets. You could keep your grade 6 FKA score but ditch the other two parts of the style. As the tone is now, I'm pretty sure they'd take me handing this to them worse than a X for dummies book.
  - Radix 17y ago
    Why can't you simply deride the language while praising the approach. Then the adult can believe you aren't being patronizing, maybe the book is, but the book is an effective way to learn. The teenagers can run through it in a short time (or read through it if they should be reading another book), and the adults will be fine. Have you heard how many adults say "oh I'm not very good with computers"? What's there to be good with? Not that the book is worth derision, just as a tactic for those who take themselves too seriously.
    - gte910h 17y ago
      As I said before: >It's not me I'm worried about it coming off as patronizing to. I know Zed's history. I'm not going to have issues using the book. But random non-programmers don't. And those are the people I'd hand the book to. I've got a thicker skin than some of them, and wouldn't care about the tone of the tome even if he directly insulted me. But THEY would. That's the issue.