7 ms·
Why not both? I think OP means that we should be nice and honest.
by Jaxan 9y ago
Why not both? I think OP means that we should be nice and honest.
- donatj 9y agoI posit there is no nice way to reflect when something is actual garbage. When it should go into the trash bin instead of being merged, even with modifications. It’s never going to be nice to hear. In lessening the blow you lose the message. You lose the true meaning. You lie.
- russdpale 9y agoOr it just means someone lacks a proper grasp of the English language! I find a thesaurus is handy.
- donatj 9y agoPlease use your thesaurus and enlighten me to how then I say “this code is garbage” in a nice way, while clearly communicating the full meaning of: - this code is bad - you should reassess your skills and values that lead you to believe this was good - your worldview may be flawed, look into that - don’t do this again - you should probably feel bad too, to attach emotion to strengthen your memories of this to make this a learning experience
- rtpg 9y agoDo you not understand the emotional cruelty of trying to say all 6 things at once to someone who (in theory) is actually trying to contribute? Maybe someone is not trying. Maybe you're wasting your breath then. Maybe someone is trying, but has an incomplete world view. Ok great, now you've pissed them off instead of saying what's wrong. Just say what's wrong with the code! That's what actually matters. Not that you think it's garbage.
- notyourday 9y agorm -rf
- somestag 9y agoI don't think there's a native English speaker in the world who reads the phrase "<x> is garbage" and interprets that literally as "this is just a metaphor for deciding not to use something and thus throwing it out." No, there's always vitriol, and the writer knows that, which is why they say it like that--because they're feeling vitriolic. I'm sure you can imagine equally accurate ways to reject code contributions; it doesn't really take any creativity. When you say that the "true meaning" is lost, what you're really saying is the true meaning was to make the contributor feel bad. If you want to defend that, go ahead, but that intent needs to be out in the open, not hidden behind the plausible deniability of words.
- donatj 9y agoThe vitriol is the most important part of the message. If they don’t feel bad about what they’ve done what reason do they have not to do it again? Without the vitriol you solve only the most immediate problem, when the true intention of calling something g garbage is to prevent many future problems. You learn nothing from being politely shoed off.
- somestag 9y agoAre you arguing that it's impossible to learn without feeling bad about yourself? As in, you must feel personally ashamed and hurt, or else you're going to make the mistake again? If not, you're probably going to have to explain your position a little more, because that's how I'm reading it right now. Note, this can't be some abstract equivalence between "feel bad" and "know you made a mistake," because if that's what you meant, then we're back to the vitriol being unnecessary.
- donatj 9y agoLook back on your life. Do you remember the individual lessons in school? Unlikely. Do you remember the time you got sent to the principals office or the time you got yelled at for breaking a lamp or having a party? Much more likely. Lessons bundled with strong emotions make far better memories.