3 ms·

Crikey. Nitpicking a single sentence (in a document of hundreds of pages) to the degree you just did is not nearly useful as you seem to think. Sometimes a s

Crikey. Nitpicking a single sentence (in a document of hundreds of pages) to the degree you just did is not nearly useful as you seem to think. Sometimes a sentence is a little too general, or too specific. It happens often and we all know that. Indeed, in this short post I've probably already committed that sin. 100% guaranteed you made several errors (especially of degree) in the post above.

kragen 2y ago
There's an enormous difference between "sometimes a sentence is a little too general, or too specific" and making 12 serious factual errors in 86 words. My comment is 1944 words, at least according to Emacs; if it had the same error density, it would have not just several errors (though I note you were unable to find any!) but 271 serious ones. You did make one error in your comment, though; when you said "Nitpicking a single sentence", you implied that my comment only dissected the errors in a single sentence, rather than an entire paragraph. When text is carefully drafted by competent people, it is impossible to "nitpick" it to the degree I just did. It is very rare to find something either as error-filled or as badly written as this paragraph. The fact that the document is hundreds of pages long makes the situation far worse, not better; all of those hundreds of pages seem to be of the same appalling quality.
- mixmastamyk 2y ago
  Only skimmed your comment. Because swebok and your scathing critique are not important enough. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
  - kragen 2y ago
    What, you think I wrote the SWEBOK? Or maybe you just don't understand the Shakespeare you're quoting any more than you understood what I was saying in the first place.
kragen 2y ago
In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41918401 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41918401 you admit that you only skimmed my comment; that's why you mistook it for nitpicking. Consequently, your response is wholly incorrect.

kragen 2y ago

There's an enormous difference between "sometimes a sentence is a little too general, or too specific" and making 12 serious factual errors in 86 words. My comment is 1944 words, at least according to Emacs; if it had the same error density, it would have not just several errors (though I note you were unable to find any!) but 271 serious ones. You did make one error in your comment, though; when you said "Nitpicking a single sentence", you implied that my comment only dissected the errors in a single sentence, rather than an entire paragraph. When text is carefully drafted by competent people, it is impossible to "nitpick" it to the degree I just did. It is very rare to find something either as error-filled or as badly written as this paragraph. The fact that the document is hundreds of pages long makes the situation far worse, not better; all of those hundreds of pages seem to be of the same appalling quality.

mixmastamyk 2y ago
Only skimmed your comment. Because swebok and your scathing critique are not important enough. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
- kragen 2y ago
  What, you think I wrote the SWEBOK? Or maybe you just don't understand the Shakespeare you're quoting any more than you understood what I was saying in the first place.

kragen 2y ago

In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41918401 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41918401 you admit that you only skimmed my comment; that's why you mistook it for nitpicking. Consequently, your response is wholly incorrect.