20 ms·

I actually kind of enjoyed watching this guy spin himself into a frenzy and conclude that the NYT editors have no basic understanding of anything, based solely

I actually kind of enjoyed watching this guy spin himself into a frenzy and conclude that the NYT editors have no basic understanding of anything, based solely on what could have easily just been a typo. Some people really have too much time on their hands.

steveitis 17y ago
You posted a comment about your enjoyment of the authors failure, and judged his time management skills due to the fact that he posted his rant about another persons failure on the internet. Do you not see the hypocrisy?
- IsaacSchlueter 17y ago
  Isn't your response to the comment (and my response to yours) guilty of the same fault? If we keep going like this, we'll meta ourselves up a black hole or something.
  - georgekv 17y ago
    Too late. http://xkcd.com/386/ http://xkcd.com/386/
  - jongraehl 17y ago
    The fault of hypocrisy? No.
- codexon 17y ago
  His 2 sentence comment likely took up a lot less time than the author's rant.
- gloob 17y ago
  The commenter you responded to wasn't being amused by the author's time management skills (or lack thereof). He was amused by the author's emotional state. So, no, they aren't being hypocritical about it.
bugs 17y ago
Especially considering his evidence is limited to one short article in the opinion section.
- ubernostrum 17y ago
  You may want to follow up by reading this, or other books by Paulos: http://www.amazon.com/dp/038548254X/ http://www.amazon.com/dp/038548254X/
camccann 17y ago
Sure, it could have been a typo, or some other minor mistake. But he's also correct that it's hilariously wrong. Is it really asking too much that something published in the New York Times either have sufficient editing and proofreading to not make an embarrassing typo, or refrain from using terms they don't understand the meaning of, whichever the case may be? Even if it's only an editorial, it undermines confidence in the paper as a whole. How often do they make similarly silly mistakes on things where I don't know better?

steveitis 17y ago

You posted a comment about your enjoyment of the authors failure, and judged his time management skills due to the fact that he posted his rant about another persons failure on the internet. Do you not see the hypocrisy?

IsaacSchlueter 17y ago
Isn't your response to the comment (and my response to yours) guilty of the same fault? If we keep going like this, we'll meta ourselves up a black hole or something.
- georgekv 17y ago
  Too late. http://xkcd.com/386/ http://xkcd.com/386/
- jongraehl 17y ago
  The fault of hypocrisy? No.
codexon 17y ago
His 2 sentence comment likely took up a lot less time than the author's rant.
gloob 17y ago
The commenter you responded to wasn't being amused by the author's time management skills (or lack thereof). He was amused by the author's emotional state. So, no, they aren't being hypocritical about it.

bugs 17y ago

Especially considering his evidence is limited to one short article in the opinion section.

ubernostrum 17y ago
You may want to follow up by reading this, or other books by Paulos: http://www.amazon.com/dp/038548254X/ http://www.amazon.com/dp/038548254X/

camccann 17y ago

Sure, it could have been a typo, or some other minor mistake. But he's also correct that it's hilariously wrong. Is it really asking too much that something published in the New York Times either have sufficient editing and proofreading to not make an embarrassing typo, or refrain from using terms they don't understand the meaning of, whichever the case may be? Even if it's only an editorial, it undermines confidence in the paper as a whole. How often do they make similarly silly mistakes on things where I don't know better?