4 ms·

Way to dump on autistic people, man. You really think they don't have enough problems, you gotta blame them for this too? If you wanna make something better, c

by Shog9 12y ago

Way to dump on autistic people, man. You really think they don't have enough problems, you gotta blame them for this too? If you wanna make something better, call out specific behaviors - ideally, punctuated with specific examples - and explain why they're harmful. That way folks who care can learn something, and teach others. Yes, even if they do have autism.

pbhjpbhj 12y ago
>this sort of autistic 'oh look at how closely I follow the rules' nonsense // He's not referring to autism he's referring to a sort of pharisaical uber-pedantry that fails to properly acknowledge the purpose of the rules, and the purpose of the forum, instead looking only at the letter of the regulations. You might call it lack of a good faith effort to interpret the question positively. I'm guessing you knew that.
- Shog9 12y ago
  While your defense of his vitriol is noble, I'm less convinced of his good intentions. Sadly, this isn't the first time I've run across statements like this; they're all too common in support emails sent to us at Stack Exchange. Rather than making an effort to express their concerns and disagreements, all too many people jump to the assumption that because someone disagrees with them they must have some deep-seated problem that they're inflicting on others rather than dealing with. Perhaps it is cathartic for the person writing, but it is frustrating and wholly unproductive for everyone they subject to it.
roel_v 12y ago
Because when somebody says 'watch out where you're going, are you blind' when somebody almost runs them over, they mean that they think the person driving has 0% vision and that all blind people drive over other people? I'm not sure what your point is. Instead of devoting paragraphs on 'detailed behaviors - ideally punctuated with specific examples', I use one word that perfectly conveys my intent. Not a single person (who is not autistic, which does make my post a catch-22 situation) would think that I actually meant that I am blaming people who are medically diagnosed as scoring high on the autism spectrum for the demise of SO. (come to think of it, and given the context of this whole inane thread, I'm not sure if maybe you are just parodying the GP - if so, nicely done, and I admit it went over my head until after writing the above)

by Shog9 12y ago

pbhjpbhj 12y ago

>this sort of autistic 'oh look at how closely I follow the rules' nonsense // He's not referring to autism he's referring to a sort of pharisaical uber-pedantry that fails to properly acknowledge the purpose of the rules, and the purpose of the forum, instead looking only at the letter of the regulations. You might call it lack of a good faith effort to interpret the question positively. I'm guessing you knew that.

Shog9 12y ago
While your defense of his vitriol is noble, I'm less convinced of his good intentions. Sadly, this isn't the first time I've run across statements like this; they're all too common in support emails sent to us at Stack Exchange. Rather than making an effort to express their concerns and disagreements, all too many people jump to the assumption that because someone disagrees with them they must have some deep-seated problem that they're inflicting on others rather than dealing with. Perhaps it is cathartic for the person writing, but it is frustrating and wholly unproductive for everyone they subject to it.

roel_v 12y ago

Because when somebody says 'watch out where you're going, are you blind' when somebody almost runs them over, they mean that they think the person driving has 0% vision and that all blind people drive over other people? I'm not sure what your point is. Instead of devoting paragraphs on 'detailed behaviors - ideally punctuated with specific examples', I use one word that perfectly conveys my intent. Not a single person (who is not autistic, which does make my post a catch-22 situation) would think that I actually meant that I am blaming people who are medically diagnosed as scoring high on the autism spectrum for the demise of SO. (come to think of it, and given the context of this whole inane thread, I'm not sure if maybe you are just parodying the GP - if so, nicely done, and I admit it went over my head until after writing the above)