7 ms·

> It's easy in the simplified mental model that you have constructed devoid of real world context. I constructed my mental model based on the detailed descript

> It's easy in the simplified mental model that you have constructed devoid of real world context. I constructed my mental model based on the detailed description by a BaseCamp engineer of what he'd have to do in order to solve the problem in his system! > I'm going to stop arguing now because you're not even responding to my actual argument. Welcome to my world: you've been arguing this whole time as if I were claiming that BaseCamp engineers were incompetent when I've only been saying that I don't trust that they are competent. > There exists a potential feature which could be implemented in Basecamp faster than in your product (and vice versa). There are probably many such features. That's really beside the point, unless you're claiming some additional knowledge here that the decisions made in this particular design contributed to the ease of those potential features. If you're only assuming that because you trust the competence of 37signals, your entire argument is circular and depends on the very claim I'm contesting.

dasil003 16y ago
Welcome to my world: you've been arguing this whole time as if I were claiming that BaseCamp engineers were incompetent when I've only been saying that I don't trust that they are competent. Do you realize how weaselly that is? What does that mean? Connotatively it takes a huge swipe at the 37s team without actually making any commitment. You might as well have said nothing at all if you're not going to take a real stand.
- jemfinch 16y ago
  > Do you realize how weaselly that is? What does that mean? There's a distinct difference between saying that you know someone is incompetent, and saying that you don't know that someone is competent. It's the same as the difference between agnosticism and atheism. What I am also saying, and what you're probably really arguing with, is that the linked article constitutes evidence against 37s' competence. That's still very different than saying that it shows that they're incompetent, which is how you've been mischaracterizing my posts.
  - dasil003 16y ago
    There's a distinct difference between saying that you know someone is incompetent, and saying that you don't know that someone is competent. It's the same as the difference between agnosticism and atheism. Understood, but it's still weaselly because you're offhandedly casting aspersions on a group of people's ability ("I have no reason to believe those people are competent") and then pretending like it doesn't hurt their reputation because of the exact words you spoke ("I never said they were incompetent, just that I have no reason to believe they are competent"). Agnosticism vs atheism, while logically the same distinction does not have this libelous aspect to it.

dasil003 16y ago

Welcome to my world: you've been arguing this whole time as if I were claiming that BaseCamp engineers were incompetent when I've only been saying that I don't trust that they are competent. Do you realize how weaselly that is? What does that mean? Connotatively it takes a huge swipe at the 37s team without actually making any commitment. You might as well have said nothing at all if you're not going to take a real stand.

jemfinch 16y ago
> Do you realize how weaselly that is? What does that mean? There's a distinct difference between saying that you know someone is incompetent, and saying that you don't know that someone is competent. It's the same as the difference between agnosticism and atheism. What I am also saying, and what you're probably really arguing with, is that the linked article constitutes evidence against 37s' competence. That's still very different than saying that it shows that they're incompetent, which is how you've been mischaracterizing my posts.
- dasil003 16y ago
  There's a distinct difference between saying that you know someone is incompetent, and saying that you don't know that someone is competent. It's the same as the difference between agnosticism and atheism. Understood, but it's still weaselly because you're offhandedly casting aspersions on a group of people's ability ("I have no reason to believe those people are competent") and then pretending like it doesn't hurt their reputation because of the exact words you spoke ("I never said they were incompetent, just that I have no reason to believe they are competent"). Agnosticism vs atheism, while logically the same distinction does not have this libelous aspect to it.