3 ms·

heh. His reputation appears to be a many faceted thing. I, for instance, have been genuinely impressed with his productivity and his output, his choice of pro

heh. His reputation appears to be a many faceted thing. I, for instance, have been genuinely impressed with his productivity and his output, his choice of projects and his code and am moved by that aspect of myself that values quality to think very highly of him. You, on the other hand, appear to feel that the most important aspect of his output is the way he achieves the standards that you have set for him - judged by how he expresses himself towards those who he feels are being disrespectful or rude at him on the internet. Just out of interest, do you believe that making a strongly negative personal judgment based on a 'fact' that is clearly incorrect and could be easily checked with just a few clicks is the act of a professional? do you meet your own high standards?

llambda 15y ago
First I will call out your blatant fallacy: tu quoque. Now let's review things: I readily admit I'm a hypocrite. But also note, I don't claim nor ever claimed to be a professional; I'm not. I'm not at the helm of projects that are useful to and used by many people. I haven't written books on the topic of computer science. Nor have I given talks or do I run a website that receives a large volume of traffic. Maybe that qualifies [him] as working in the domain of a professional, yes? Although he may have achieved great things, this doesn't give him a license to troll HN and it doesn't excuse him of baseless personal attacks. The comments he made that I replied to were no less than that, at best. At worst, they were insight into his character. Certainly we can hope the latter is not true. Nonetheless, there's no place for that kind of bullshit; it's inexcusable, I don't care who you are. I made such a judgement because he clearly attacked the user "hp" who had done nothing more than make an observation about texts that introduce C in general. Zed's reaction was puerile, irrational, and even paranoid. I hope you aren't standing up for such behavior?
- bandushrew 15y ago
  "Maybe that qualifies [him] as working in the domain of a professional, yes?" Either you think he is a professional, or you do not. You appear to be holding up a standard, claiming that you believe he fits the criteria needed to be judged by it, and then lambasting him for not living up to the standard you have set. Overall, I find this somewhat confusing, but possibly I dont have sufficient context to judge. TBH Im not particularly motivated to 'stand up' for the behavior of anyone I dont know. I am interested in what makes you so interested in casting judgment on Zed, as opposed to on yourself? Whatever puerile, irrational and paranoid responses Zed may have produced, you seem to be matching them with a self admitted hypocrisy, a large amount of self righteous vitriol and a bewildering statement of tribal affiliation to an anonymous internet discussion forum that apparently requires your outraged protection lest it collapses completely under the weight of a misunderstanding between Zed and another participant. Zed has, to my knowledge, done you no harm of any kind. He certainly represents absolutely no realistic threat to HN. why do you feel justified abusing him in this fashion?
  - llambda 15y ago
    tu quoque. [1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
    - bandushrew 15y ago
      dude, I heard you before. It doesn't apply in this case. I will leave it as an exercise for the reader to discern why.

llambda 15y ago

First I will call out your blatant fallacy: tu quoque. Now let's review things: I readily admit I'm a hypocrite. But also note, I don't claim nor ever claimed to be a professional; I'm not. I'm not at the helm of projects that are useful to and used by many people. I haven't written books on the topic of computer science. Nor have I given talks or do I run a website that receives a large volume of traffic. Maybe that qualifies [him] as working in the domain of a professional, yes? Although he may have achieved great things, this doesn't give him a license to troll HN and it doesn't excuse him of baseless personal attacks. The comments he made that I replied to were no less than that, at best. At worst, they were insight into his character. Certainly we can hope the latter is not true. Nonetheless, there's no place for that kind of bullshit; it's inexcusable, I don't care who you are. I made such a judgement because he clearly attacked the user "hp" who had done nothing more than make an observation about texts that introduce C in general. Zed's reaction was puerile, irrational, and even paranoid. I hope you aren't standing up for such behavior?

bandushrew 15y ago
"Maybe that qualifies [him] as working in the domain of a professional, yes?" Either you think he is a professional, or you do not. You appear to be holding up a standard, claiming that you believe he fits the criteria needed to be judged by it, and then lambasting him for not living up to the standard you have set. Overall, I find this somewhat confusing, but possibly I dont have sufficient context to judge. TBH Im not particularly motivated to 'stand up' for the behavior of anyone I dont know. I am interested in what makes you so interested in casting judgment on Zed, as opposed to on yourself? Whatever puerile, irrational and paranoid responses Zed may have produced, you seem to be matching them with a self admitted hypocrisy, a large amount of self righteous vitriol and a bewildering statement of tribal affiliation to an anonymous internet discussion forum that apparently requires your outraged protection lest it collapses completely under the weight of a misunderstanding between Zed and another participant. Zed has, to my knowledge, done you no harm of any kind. He certainly represents absolutely no realistic threat to HN. why do you feel justified abusing him in this fashion?
- llambda 15y ago
  tu quoque. [1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
  - bandushrew 15y ago
    dude, I heard you before. It doesn't apply in this case. I will leave it as an exercise for the reader to discern why.