3 ms·
But nobody said they wouldn't use it. You said that. You came up with this idea and then demanded other people defend it. I don't know why "critiquing the tool
by windowshopping 3y ago
But nobody said they wouldn't use it. You said that. You came up with this idea and then demanded other people defend it.
I don't know why "critiquing the tool" is being equated to "refusing to use the tool."
I don't like calling something a strawman, because I think it's an overused argument, but...I mean...
- rkeene2 3y agoI didn't come up with it nor ask anyone to defend it. I asked a different question about usefulness, and about what it means to him for something to be "broken". My point is that the attempt to critique it was a failure. It provided no critique. It was incomplete at the very least -- it assigned it the label of broken, but didn't explain the implications of that. It didn't define at what level of failure it would need to be to valuable. Additionally, I didn't indicate whether or not he would refuse to use it -- specifically because I didn't know, because he didn't say. We all use broken tools built on a fragile foundation of imperfect precision.