3 ms·

Isn't the meaning of milquetoast opposite to what you are probably trying to convey?

by kshri24 7mo ago

keybored 7mo ago
Is it?
nchmy 7mo ago
I think they don't understand what milquetoast actually means, as the post defintiely isn't - django quite clearly asserted themselves and their rules. What the parent comment was probably trying to say was something like "a completely reasonable, uncontroversial post that I'm glad to see them make", but chose milquetoast (a word that no normal human ever uses - and certainly not in casual conversation) due to an affectation of one kind or another.
- igorhvr 7mo ago
  On the contrary, they could have stated their points much more bluntly and strongly than they did in the post. I had the same impression upon reading it. Milquetoast perfectly describes it, I am happy to see less common words used around here (specially when the convey the intended meaning this precisely), and I find claiming "affectation" of the person who used it unnecessarily rude.
  - nchmy 7mo ago
    Here's a good use of LLMs - asking whether this article is milquetoast. It's not. https://chatgpt.com/share/69b9be3b-a298-8009-bb21-c3afef1e5edf https://chatgpt.com/share/69b9be3b-a298-8009-bb21-c3afef1e5e... Moreover, that word doesn't even fit within the parent comment's context. > Incredibly milquetoast. I would not like to work with anyone who goes against these points. reply They use milquetoast as a positive thing, and the opposite of how you use it. You're unfortunately mistaken about everything here.
    - keybored 7mo ago
      A use of LLMs is when you are in your second reply and you don’t have the will to make your own argument. The post is timid and conciliatory, spending words on some weird bargaining on all the wonderful things you can do with LLMs in preparation for a contribution. Who cares? I’m not in the Django project, but I’d think (living in These Times and all) that the thrust ought to be more about how no-effort faux contributions are wasting people’s time. At some point you can say: you’ve been warned, others have warned about this for years as well, and we don’t take kindly to you pinging us in any form. But if someone disagrees with this milquetoast proposal or stance? If they want to defy even this and go ahead and “spend tokens” by trying to shovel unlabeled, generated code into the project? Then that’s the kind of person that I don’t want to work with. I hope that clarifies milquetoast hermeneutics.
      - nchmy 7mo ago
        Great to see that you're now in agreement that your original comment made no sense!
        keybored 7mo ago
        What I wrote last was the expanded thought process for my original comment, the same sentiment. For those who don’t understand what milquetoast means. You can try your luck with some text slot machines. Maybe they will be able to analyze and find some discrepancies. Not that I would read those analyses.

Isn't the meaning of milquetoast opposite to what you are probably trying to convey?

by kshri24 7mo ago

Isn't the meaning of milquetoast opposite to what you are probably trying to convey?

keybored 7mo ago

Is it?

nchmy 7mo ago

I think they don't understand what milquetoast actually means, as the post defintiely isn't - django quite clearly asserted themselves and their rules. What the parent comment was probably trying to say was something like "a completely reasonable, uncontroversial post that I'm glad to see them make", but chose milquetoast (a word that no normal human ever uses - and certainly not in casual conversation) due to an affectation of one kind or another.

igorhvr 7mo ago
On the contrary, they could have stated their points much more bluntly and strongly than they did in the post. I had the same impression upon reading it. Milquetoast perfectly describes it, I am happy to see less common words used around here (specially when the convey the intended meaning this precisely), and I find claiming "affectation" of the person who used it unnecessarily rude.
- nchmy 7mo ago
  Here's a good use of LLMs - asking whether this article is milquetoast. It's not. https://chatgpt.com/share/69b9be3b-a298-8009-bb21-c3afef1e5edf https://chatgpt.com/share/69b9be3b-a298-8009-bb21-c3afef1e5e... Moreover, that word doesn't even fit within the parent comment's context. > Incredibly milquetoast. I would not like to work with anyone who goes against these points. reply They use milquetoast as a positive thing, and the opposite of how you use it. You're unfortunately mistaken about everything here.
  - keybored 7mo ago
    A use of LLMs is when you are in your second reply and you don’t have the will to make your own argument. The post is timid and conciliatory, spending words on some weird bargaining on all the wonderful things you can do with LLMs in preparation for a contribution. Who cares? I’m not in the Django project, but I’d think (living in These Times and all) that the thrust ought to be more about how no-effort faux contributions are wasting people’s time. At some point you can say: you’ve been warned, others have warned about this for years as well, and we don’t take kindly to you pinging us in any form. But if someone disagrees with this milquetoast proposal or stance? If they want to defy even this and go ahead and “spend tokens” by trying to shovel unlabeled, generated code into the project? Then that’s the kind of person that I don’t want to work with. I hope that clarifies milquetoast hermeneutics.
    - nchmy 7mo ago
      Great to see that you're now in agreement that your original comment made no sense!
      - keybored 7mo ago
        What I wrote last was the expanded thought process for my original comment, the same sentiment. For those who don’t understand what milquetoast means. You can try your luck with some text slot machines. Maybe they will be able to analyze and find some discrepancies. Not that I would read those analyses.