4 ms·

Please. I'm not anti-geek. It was a deliberate exaggeration in order to highlight the absurdity of the actual arguments MOST geeks do make. And, for the record

Please. I'm not anti-geek. It was a deliberate exaggeration in order to highlight the absurdity of the actual arguments MOST geeks do make. And, for the record, I've heard various forms on those actually used - well, except the binary name one. And that one was a joke. I totally understand that my writing is not for everyone, but it seems like you are deliberately misinterpreting it. I mean, that phrasing was couched between "tailywaily" and calling an elephant "muscly cookie dough." Surely it was obvious that while the content was serious, the delivery was not. There is a pattern - yes, even on HN - of saying "I'm bad with names" or "I'm not an artist" -- and then turning around and denigrating those skills that other people have taken the time & effort to develop. They hide behind a shield of überrationality instead of admitting that they find marketing & other social skills distasteful or frightening because they are hard. Maybe as a designer/writer/social butterfly in addition to programmer, I have more of those comments directed at me than you do. Or maybe I just notice them more readily.

potatolicious 17y ago
> It was a deliberate exaggeration in order to highlight the absurdity of the actual arguments MOST geeks do make. And that's the unnecessary bit - by caricaturing whatever real perceived problem there is you've both lost credibility and created a strawman where none needed to have been created. If geeks make these absurd arguments, then repeat them, let your readers be the judge of it. As it is all you have are farcically exaggerated fake quotes, which does little to convince the reader that any problem even exists. > I've heard various forms on those actually used I've also heard new programmer hires exclaim "what's SQL?!". This doesn't mean it's a common (or even uncommon) occurrence. I too have met people (from all walks of life, mind you) who are vehemently against product placement and advertisement in any form... doesn't mean they are common, and certainly I do not get the impression this attitude is more prevalent in the geek community than elsewhere. > "I'm bad with names" or "I'm not an artist" -- and then turning around and denigrating those skills that other people have taken the time & effort to develop. I agree with you here, but again, this is not a problem unique to the geek community. It's a problem that seems to span all of humanity... e.g., "I'm no computer whiz / What a nerd!" Calling out the geek community on this is unnecessary and distracts from the fact that it's a far more fundamental human issue.
- ahoyhere 17y ago
  If deliberate, humorous exaggeration in argument is wrong, I'm in some great company! e.g. Mark Twain, Oscar Wilde, yaddayadda. I'm not saying I'm half as good as they are, but your assertion that it shouldn't be used comes across as rather strident. And by adding your new programmer/what's SQL? argument, you fell into the same trap yourself. We're not going to agree, might as well not bother.
  - anamax 17y ago
    > If deliberate, humorous exaggeration in argument is wrong, I'm in some great company! e.g. Mark Twain, Oscar Wilde, yaddayadda. Are you trying to do what they did? If not....
Confusion 17y ago
There is a pattern - yes, even on HN - of saying "I'm bad with names" or "I'm not an artist" -- and then turning around and denigrating those skills that other people have taken the time & effort to develop. Perhaps, but if that is the case, then I don't doubt someone corrects them and they learn. Then their stance becomes "I'm bad with names and while I understand it can be an asset, I don't believe it is worth my time" and "I'm not an artist, but I understand how designing a UI is tricky work and I'm glad we have someone who is good at it. If I had to design that UI, it would suck.". The next stage of enlightenment may come when they say such things to equivalents of their historical selves and someone yet again adds something to their understanding, for instance by pointing out how they could understand these skills better and how that are perhaps even more worth then they thought. Or by pointing out that while they were paying lip-service to the concept with their 'I respect that' utterings, they actually still seem to look down on the skills. Finally, some people really are unmovingly convinced of something seemingly ludicrous, but they can defend that position, even when we disagree. Instead of bashing them for not conforming, we can sometimes learn from them, because they make us reconsider a core assumption. Perhaps 'marketers' really are all lying scumbags, but we don't see that, because people like you keep nuancing and defending what they do, which keeps hiding their actual natures. Edit: To explain that last paragraph some more: sometimes there aren't multiple levels of enlightenment and you were right in the first instance. While everyone is busy sketching complex, nuanced, faceted, balanced accounts of the issue, all they are doing is in fact trying to straighten what is bent beyond repair. Why? Because society asserts it is straight and we try to fit in. As an example, most atheists (want to) allow for religions in their world view. Everyone, them included, bash those 'intolerant' atheists that firmly hold there should not be any room for any religion. But the latter party may simply be right in asserting that humanity will be best of if we started a hundred year effort to get rid of all the religions. If that were the case, then a seemingly simple view would yield the best results, while all the nuanced accounts turned out to be nothing but fog.

potatolicious 17y ago

> It was a deliberate exaggeration in order to highlight the absurdity of the actual arguments MOST geeks do make. And that's the unnecessary bit - by caricaturing whatever real perceived problem there is you've both lost credibility and created a strawman where none needed to have been created. If geeks make these absurd arguments, then repeat them, let your readers be the judge of it. As it is all you have are farcically exaggerated fake quotes, which does little to convince the reader that any problem even exists. > I've heard various forms on those actually used I've also heard new programmer hires exclaim "what's SQL?!". This doesn't mean it's a common (or even uncommon) occurrence. I too have met people (from all walks of life, mind you) who are vehemently against product placement and advertisement in any form... doesn't mean they are common, and certainly I do not get the impression this attitude is more prevalent in the geek community than elsewhere. > "I'm bad with names" or "I'm not an artist" -- and then turning around and denigrating those skills that other people have taken the time & effort to develop. I agree with you here, but again, this is not a problem unique to the geek community. It's a problem that seems to span all of humanity... e.g., "I'm no computer whiz / What a nerd!" Calling out the geek community on this is unnecessary and distracts from the fact that it's a far more fundamental human issue.

ahoyhere 17y ago
If deliberate, humorous exaggeration in argument is wrong, I'm in some great company! e.g. Mark Twain, Oscar Wilde, yaddayadda. I'm not saying I'm half as good as they are, but your assertion that it shouldn't be used comes across as rather strident. And by adding your new programmer/what's SQL? argument, you fell into the same trap yourself. We're not going to agree, might as well not bother.
- anamax 17y ago
  > If deliberate, humorous exaggeration in argument is wrong, I'm in some great company! e.g. Mark Twain, Oscar Wilde, yaddayadda. Are you trying to do what they did? If not....

Confusion 17y ago

There is a pattern - yes, even on HN - of saying "I'm bad with names" or "I'm not an artist" -- and then turning around and denigrating those skills that other people have taken the time & effort to develop. Perhaps, but if that is the case, then I don't doubt someone corrects them and they learn. Then their stance becomes "I'm bad with names and while I understand it can be an asset, I don't believe it is worth my time" and "I'm not an artist, but I understand how designing a UI is tricky work and I'm glad we have someone who is good at it. If I had to design that UI, it would suck.". The next stage of enlightenment may come when they say such things to equivalents of their historical selves and someone yet again adds something to their understanding, for instance by pointing out how they could understand these skills better and how that are perhaps even more worth then they thought. Or by pointing out that while they were paying lip-service to the concept with their 'I respect that' utterings, they actually still seem to look down on the skills. Finally, some people really are unmovingly convinced of something seemingly ludicrous, but they can defend that position, even when we disagree. Instead of bashing them for not conforming, we can sometimes learn from them, because they make us reconsider a core assumption. Perhaps 'marketers' really are all lying scumbags, but we don't see that, because people like you keep nuancing and defending what they do, which keeps hiding their actual natures. Edit: To explain that last paragraph some more: sometimes there aren't multiple levels of enlightenment and you were right in the first instance. While everyone is busy sketching complex, nuanced, faceted, balanced accounts of the issue, all they are doing is in fact trying to straighten what is bent beyond repair. Why? Because society asserts it is straight and we try to fit in. As an example, most atheists (want to) allow for religions in their world view. Everyone, them included, bash those 'intolerant' atheists that firmly hold there should not be any room for any religion. But the latter party may simply be right in asserting that humanity will be best of if we started a hundred year effort to get rid of all the religions. If that were the case, then a seemingly simple view would yield the best results, while all the nuanced accounts turned out to be nothing but fog.