3 ms·

Can you give me an example of criticism that is not negative? As far as I know, all forms of criticisms involve pointing out a flaw or fault. There's constructi

Can you give me an example of criticism that is not negative? As far as I know, all forms of criticisms involve pointing out a flaw or fault. There's constructive criticism, but it's still fundamentally negative. Either way, feel free to replace the word "negative" with "criticism" in my comment if you want. It expresses the same thing I intended to express: I disagree with the criticism. If we're not Pollyannas and we're all "adults who can handle criticism," then you should also be able to handle criticism of criticism. It goes both ways.

j_maffe 2y ago
Negative comments are not always a product of negativity. Sometimes it's positive feedback to improve something that has potential.
- burntsushi 2y ago
  I think that can be true and my top-level comment can be true simultaneously. I've also clarified what I meant at this point.
beart 2y ago
I've been thinking about your comment that all criticism is negative and I'm not sure where to go with that in my mind. I think it very much depends on your definitions of "criticism" and "negative". For example, a movie critic could praise a movie, 100% score, no faults. That's still a criticism by many definitions. But the interesting thing about this is "the eye of the beholder". I suppose to some folks, all criticism does seem to be negative... which is why code reviews can turn into nightmares... and helps explain why I recently received a very angry phone call from another engineer because of some changes that were made to "his code". For the purposes of this discussion, the oddity seems to be the folks jumping to defend the software they had no part in creating. Why does the criticism result in negative feelings for them? I can understand the author taking issue with it, but someone else's criticism should not impact another's ability to utilize the software for whatever purposes.
- burntsushi 2y ago
  I don't want to play a definitions game and dissect word meanings here. I think it's usually a waste of time. That's why I implored folks to just accept a revision in wording in my previous comment. What I intended to convey was this: 1. There were many comments providing criticism that I disagreed with. 2. I felt that the vibe given by the comments at the time was not commensurate with how much utility the tool brought me in my own workflow. So it seemed useful to point this out. That is, that there was a gap in the commentary that I thought I could fill. Obviously I won't be using this phrasing again because it spawned off a huge meta sub-thread that I think is generally a huge waste of time and space. > For the purposes of this discussion, the oddity seems to be the folks jumping to defend the software they had no part in creating. Why does the criticism result in negative feelings for them? I can understand the author taking issue with it, but someone else's criticism should not impact another's ability to utilize the software for whatever purposes. Again, it cuts both ways. Why isn't it odd for folks to jump in and express criticism of software they had no part in creating? If folks can express negative criticism, then why can't I express positive feedback? I didn't say people shouldn't make those comments. I said it was unwarranted. Or in other words, that it was undeserved and that I disagreed with it. Or that some balance was appropriate. This has literally nothing to do with my ability to utilize the software. I don't know why you're going down that road.
cryptonector 2y ago
I think GP is saying that you didn't need to focus on the negativity (which is in itself negativity), just say the substantive thing that you wanted to say without editorializing about negativity. Your complaint (negativity) about negativity might be over-done, and anyways not useful. We can all shake our own heads at others' possibly-unnecessary negativity without having to be calling it out all the time. Meta arguments are not always useful. Besides, consider this negative comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41653797 is it one of the negative comments you didn't like? It seems like a possibly-useful negative comment -- "it didn't work for me because ..." is useful unless it was really a matter of undiagnosed PEBKAC. Would you rather than comment not have been posted? Surely not.
- burntsushi 2y ago
  I think I've clarified my position in other follow-up comments sufficiently that everything you said here has already been addressed. I even already said I would use different wording next time. And I never said folks shouldn't make those comments. I clarified that too.

j_maffe 2y ago

Negative comments are not always a product of negativity. Sometimes it's positive feedback to improve something that has potential.

burntsushi 2y ago
I think that can be true and my top-level comment can be true simultaneously. I've also clarified what I meant at this point.

beart 2y ago

I've been thinking about your comment that all criticism is negative and I'm not sure where to go with that in my mind. I think it very much depends on your definitions of "criticism" and "negative". For example, a movie critic could praise a movie, 100% score, no faults. That's still a criticism by many definitions. But the interesting thing about this is "the eye of the beholder". I suppose to some folks, all criticism does seem to be negative... which is why code reviews can turn into nightmares... and helps explain why I recently received a very angry phone call from another engineer because of some changes that were made to "his code". For the purposes of this discussion, the oddity seems to be the folks jumping to defend the software they had no part in creating. Why does the criticism result in negative feelings for them? I can understand the author taking issue with it, but someone else's criticism should not impact another's ability to utilize the software for whatever purposes.

burntsushi 2y ago
I don't want to play a definitions game and dissect word meanings here. I think it's usually a waste of time. That's why I implored folks to just accept a revision in wording in my previous comment. What I intended to convey was this: 1. There were many comments providing criticism that I disagreed with. 2. I felt that the vibe given by the comments at the time was not commensurate with how much utility the tool brought me in my own workflow. So it seemed useful to point this out. That is, that there was a gap in the commentary that I thought I could fill. Obviously I won't be using this phrasing again because it spawned off a huge meta sub-thread that I think is generally a huge waste of time and space. > For the purposes of this discussion, the oddity seems to be the folks jumping to defend the software they had no part in creating. Why does the criticism result in negative feelings for them? I can understand the author taking issue with it, but someone else's criticism should not impact another's ability to utilize the software for whatever purposes. Again, it cuts both ways. Why isn't it odd for folks to jump in and express criticism of software they had no part in creating? If folks can express negative criticism, then why can't I express positive feedback? I didn't say people shouldn't make those comments. I said it was unwarranted. Or in other words, that it was undeserved and that I disagreed with it. Or that some balance was appropriate. This has literally nothing to do with my ability to utilize the software. I don't know why you're going down that road.

cryptonector 2y ago

I think GP is saying that you didn't need to focus on the negativity (which is in itself negativity), just say the substantive thing that you wanted to say without editorializing about negativity. Your complaint (negativity) about negativity might be over-done, and anyways not useful. We can all shake our own heads at others' possibly-unnecessary negativity without having to be calling it out all the time. Meta arguments are not always useful. Besides, consider this negative comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41653797 is it one of the negative comments you didn't like? It seems like a possibly-useful negative comment -- "it didn't work for me because ..." is useful unless it was really a matter of undiagnosed PEBKAC. Would you rather than comment not have been posted? Surely not.

burntsushi 2y ago
I think I've clarified my position in other follow-up comments sufficiently that everything you said here has already been addressed. I even already said I would use different wording next time. And I never said folks shouldn't make those comments. I clarified that too.