4 ms·
Why don't people just tell us what they think, instead of what we "should" do with these kind of titles? I find this paternalism really off putting. Less lame t
by antirez 2y ago
Why don't people just tell us what they think, instead of what we "should" do with these kind of titles? I find this paternalism really off putting. Less lame title: Why I don't run XYZ.
- benterix 2y agoTotally agree, my pet peeve is "considered harmful".
- jraph 2y agoI've gotten used to hear "by whom?" in my head each time I encounter any kind of passive phrasing. (since it's a very convenient way to hide the subject when it would really matter, in addition to not have to specify the subject when it actually doesn't matter)
- Brian_K_White 2y agoThey do run BSD, so "why I don't run BSD" would be incorrect. And they are telling you what they think. This is both a totally factual warning and advocacy. Title is fine and matches the content. Even though there is another level at which some few readers end up being curious and try exactly the thing being nominally warned against, and this reaction is intentional, the surface literal meaning is also plain fact and neither misleading nor non-literal paternalistic literary device. The reasons given are actually true and are reasons one might not want to use a BSD as a desktop. The contrary reaction to reject the advice and try to run BSD is expected but only from a few people. The title and the content are 100% plain surface value good true advice. You will have those problems. As for the title, if they themselves do run BSD despite those problems, then the title is fine. They are simply reporting what life is like. There is nothing wrong with that.
- antirez 2y agoIt's a matter of style, not content.