3 ms·
I am amused that people like you assume that they put no thought into the question, because you don't like their answer. Many Usenet forums back then which had
by btilly 4y ago
I am amused that people like you assume that they put no thought into the question, because you don't like their answer.
Many Usenet forums back then which had over 100,000 regular readers and long-running discussions. For example sci.math. That worked fine with a culture of saying things accurately and simply, without undue handholding. And an expectation that the other side would put in their own elbow grease.
While effective in that culture, this is exactly the kind of behavior that outsiders call "salty gatekeeping". Never mind that the people who are being called that are often the same people who are answering question after question, and being genuinely helpful.
I do not know of any comparable unmoderated forum today which works close to that well. Or where someone with a genuine question can so reliably get high quality answers from a genuine expert.
- jghn 4y agoyes and no. Yes I agree that what you say is true. However I also remember things like people "winning" arguments by citing the other person's @aol.com or @prodigy.com email address. There was a bit of both there.
- btilly 4y agoI agree. There were certainly abrasive people, trolls, cranks, and every other kind of bad behavior. But I've known many incredibly helpful people who get called on "salty gatekeeping". In fact I've been called on that myself.