3 ms·

> Sometimes, we just have to bother reading what's in front of us. You are making an absolutely great example of that. I was absolutely not talking about the o

> Sometimes, we just have to bother reading what's in front of us. You are making an absolutely great example of that. I was absolutely not talking about the original SO post, but about the generally extremely entitled answers which assume the existence of a very specific X to the Y of a post.

inopinatus 6y ago
If I understand correctly, you're suggesting "Who are you" wasn't directed at me personally, "the person" wasn't referring to the OP but all possible authors, and "the question" wasn't referring to, well, the original SO question at hand, but the class of all possible questions. If so, then I see, I think: perhaps it was more intended as "Who is anyone to know the purpose and utility (of a question) better than the person who asks that question?" I can't answer that, since I agree with the sentiment. I'm only really pondering this one specific question, made possible because there's so much extra context with which to interpret the original text. My personal hubris doesn't generalise to the class of all possible questions, and I'd struggle to sympathise with anyone making such an ambit claim. But then, maybe it wasn't even a question at all.
- jcelerier 6y ago
  > If I understand correctly, you're suggesting "Who are you" wasn't directed at me personally, "the person" wasn't referring to the OP but all possible authors, and "the question" wasn't referring to, well, the original SO question at hand, but the class of all possible questions. yes, exactly ? but maybe it is less common to speak in such a general way in english than in my mother tongue
  - inopinatus 6y ago
    It is a form in English, example idiom might be, “the man in the street”, which in general relates “anyone in any street” and thereby simply means “ordinary people”. The potential for confusion arises when we’re already talking about a particular person, and he’s outside on the road.

inopinatus 6y ago

If I understand correctly, you're suggesting "Who are you" wasn't directed at me personally, "the person" wasn't referring to the OP but all possible authors, and "the question" wasn't referring to, well, the original SO question at hand, but the class of all possible questions. If so, then I see, I think: perhaps it was more intended as "Who is anyone to know the purpose and utility (of a question) better than the person who asks that question?" I can't answer that, since I agree with the sentiment. I'm only really pondering this one specific question, made possible because there's so much extra context with which to interpret the original text. My personal hubris doesn't generalise to the class of all possible questions, and I'd struggle to sympathise with anyone making such an ambit claim. But then, maybe it wasn't even a question at all.

jcelerier 6y ago
> If I understand correctly, you're suggesting "Who are you" wasn't directed at me personally, "the person" wasn't referring to the OP but all possible authors, and "the question" wasn't referring to, well, the original SO question at hand, but the class of all possible questions. yes, exactly ? but maybe it is less common to speak in such a general way in english than in my mother tongue
- inopinatus 6y ago
  It is a form in English, example idiom might be, “the man in the street”, which in general relates “anyone in any street” and thereby simply means “ordinary people”. The potential for confusion arises when we’re already talking about a particular person, and he’s outside on the road.