5 ms·

Sorry, but I disagree. A lot. For example, the author claims that "the slur brooks no possibility that the speaker has failed to appreciate some valuable, fulfi

Sorry, but I disagree. A lot. For example, the author claims that "the slur brooks no possibility that the speaker has failed to appreciate some valuable, fulfilling element of the subject's hobby." Here the Author claims that the Speaker failed to appreciate some element in what the Enthusiast produced. It could just as easily be interpreted as the Enthusiast's failure to produce something the Speaker could appreciate. In condemnation of the phrase he hates, the Author ascribes malicious intentions to the Speaker who uses it. That's a misrepresentation. "Too much time on his hands" usually implies that the Enthusiast produced something for which the Speaker sees no use, which prompts the Speaker to imply that it would be better to apply the Enthusiast's energies and passions on something the Speaker finds useful. Along with passing judgment on Enthusiast's work (something that upsets the Author), the Speaker also recognized the Enthusiast's passion. Of course, some of this stuff will surely be relegated to the scrapheap of history. Let's face it, most of the "fringey" stuff is relegated to the scrapheap of history. For every misunderstood genius, you have many more harmless nuts who invent and patent "Method and apparatus for automatically exercising a curious animal"[1]. What changed is our ability to perceive them globally, or, to be more precise, their ability to broadcast to a wider public. Having more freedom to direct your thoughts and opinions to a wider audience than before, does not mean you're somehow entitled to have those thoughts and opinions respected. [1] http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6701872.html http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6701872.html

nollidge 16y ago
> It could just as easily be interpreted as the Enthusiast's failure to produce something the Speaker could appreciate. Was the Enthusiast even attempting to produce something the Speaker could appreciate, or was it merely for their own amusement/edification? If it's the latter, then the Speaker's a Dick for going out of their way to insult the Enthusiast. The Speaker is not entitled to be enamored with the Enthusiast's tinkerings. Saying "you've got too much time on your hands" is telling the person that they'd be better off spending their time on something else. But who are you to judge? What entitles you to make a pronouncement like that? > the Speaker also recognized the Enthusiast's passion. They're proclaiming that the Enthusiast's passion would be better spent elsewhere, which I suppose is a recognition of the mere existence of said passion, but it's hardly a gesture of respect, as you're implying. > Having more freedom to direct your thoughts and opinions to a wider audience than before, does not mean you're somehow entitled to have those thoughts and opinions respected. No, of course not, but neither is anyone entitled to actively disrespect every flight of fancy they come across.
- CodeMage 16y ago
  Was the Enthusiast even attempting to produce something the Speaker could appreciate, or was it merely for their own amusement/edification? [...] What entitles you to make a pronouncement like that? Interesting questions, especially because they don't have only one answer. Let's say I make a video of a "fringey" hobby I have; pick anything you would profoundly useless. Let's say I send that video to a group of my friends, saying "look what I did". If it somehow finds its way to a broader audience on the Internet, for which it was not intended, and some Joe Schmoe says "this guy has too much time on his hands", then you could say that he's being a Dick. You could also say my friends were Dicks for exposing me to Joe Schmoe's ridicule. However, if I take that same video, post in on a public site, with no access controls (such as YouTube ), saying "look what I did", then I'm inviting people to give their opinions on it. I'm entitling a hypothetical Speaker to judge my work. They're proclaiming that the Enthusiast's passion would be better spent elsewhere, which I suppose is a recognition of the mere existence of said passion, but it's hardly a gesture of respect, as you're implying. I'm not implying it's a gesture of respect. I'm simply claiming that it's a recognition of that passion, because the Author's sentiment is that this passion is not recognized by people who use the phrase "too much time on his hands". Of course, we could quibble about the word "recognize". To forestall that, I'll explain that I'm using it in the sense of acknowledging something, not acclaiming something. No, of course not, but neither is anyone entitled to actively _dis_ respect every flight of fancy they come across. In other words: "Either offer a constructive criticism or shut up." That's okay, I agree with that completely. What I disagree with is reacting out of proportion to the disrespect. That kind of reaction usually comes from the false sense of entitlement, a feeling that not only people shouldn't disrespect your passions, but that they should keep quiet if they disagree.

nollidge 16y ago

> It could just as easily be interpreted as the Enthusiast's failure to produce something the Speaker could appreciate. Was the Enthusiast even attempting to produce something the Speaker could appreciate, or was it merely for their own amusement/edification? If it's the latter, then the Speaker's a Dick for going out of their way to insult the Enthusiast. The Speaker is not entitled to be enamored with the Enthusiast's tinkerings. Saying "you've got too much time on your hands" is telling the person that they'd be better off spending their time on something else. But who are you to judge? What entitles you to make a pronouncement like that? > the Speaker also recognized the Enthusiast's passion. They're proclaiming that the Enthusiast's passion would be better spent elsewhere, which I suppose is a recognition of the mere existence of said passion, but it's hardly a gesture of respect, as you're implying. > Having more freedom to direct your thoughts and opinions to a wider audience than before, does not mean you're somehow entitled to have those thoughts and opinions respected. No, of course not, but neither is anyone entitled to actively disrespect every flight of fancy they come across.

CodeMage 16y ago
Was the Enthusiast even attempting to produce something the Speaker could appreciate, or was it merely for their own amusement/edification? [...] What entitles you to make a pronouncement like that? Interesting questions, especially because they don't have only one answer. Let's say I make a video of a "fringey" hobby I have; pick anything you would profoundly useless. Let's say I send that video to a group of my friends, saying "look what I did". If it somehow finds its way to a broader audience on the Internet, for which it was not intended, and some Joe Schmoe says "this guy has too much time on his hands", then you could say that he's being a Dick. You could also say my friends were Dicks for exposing me to Joe Schmoe's ridicule. However, if I take that same video, post in on a public site, with no access controls (such as YouTube ), saying "look what I did", then I'm inviting people to give their opinions on it. I'm entitling a hypothetical Speaker to judge my work. They're proclaiming that the Enthusiast's passion would be better spent elsewhere, which I suppose is a recognition of the mere existence of said passion, but it's hardly a gesture of respect, as you're implying. I'm not implying it's a gesture of respect. I'm simply claiming that it's a recognition of that passion, because the Author's sentiment is that this passion is not recognized by people who use the phrase "too much time on his hands". Of course, we could quibble about the word "recognize". To forestall that, I'll explain that I'm using it in the sense of acknowledging something, not acclaiming something. No, of course not, but neither is anyone entitled to actively _dis_ respect every flight of fancy they come across. In other words: "Either offer a constructive criticism or shut up." That's okay, I agree with that completely. What I disagree with is reacting out of proportion to the disrespect. That kind of reaction usually comes from the false sense of entitlement, a feeling that not only people shouldn't disrespect your passions, but that they should keep quiet if they disagree.