Pyfora, a place for python
fetchinson at googlemail.com
Wed Nov 4 13:17:51 CET 2009
>>>>I was referring to this comment by Ben:
>>>>"Suggestion: Please don't make efforts to fragment the community."
>>>>This IMHO is hostile, because it presupposes that the mere goal of the
>>>>OP is fragmenting the community
>>>It presupposes nothing of any goal. It describes a predictable result of
>>>the OP's efforts, and requests those efforts to cease.
>>>So I deny the characterisation of that request as hostile.
> [mass snippitude]
>> If yes, with the substitution A = Ben and B = OP we get "in order for
>> Ben's request to make sense, Ben has to assume that the OP is making
>> an effort to fragment the community". This assumption on the part of
>> Ben, I think, is hostile, since it assumes that the OP is making an
>> effort to do something not nice. Whether the OP is indeed doing
>> something not nice, is irrelevant. If the OP does do something not
>> nice, the hostility is warranted. If the OP is not doing anything not
>> nice, the hostility is unwarranted. But the fact that Ben was hostile
>> is a fact :)
> You were doing fine until you brought in the hostility. I must agree
> with Ben that his comment was not hostile. It was merely a statement.
> Not an exclamation, no name calling, just a plain request rooted in reality.
Okay, before we get to quarks let's see what 'hostile' means :)
>From Merriam-Webster http://www.learnersdictionary.net/dictionary/hostile :
1 a : of or relating to an enemy <hostile fire>
b : marked by malevolence <a hostile act>
c : openly opposed or resisting <a hostile critic> <hostile to new ideas>
d (1) : not hospitable <plants growing in a hostile environment>
(2) : having an intimidating, antagonistic, or offensive nature
<a hostile workplace>
Now, I think the OP was perceived by Ben as doing something which he
thinks is not good. We most probably agree on this. In other words,
Ben was opposing the OP's ideas. Yet in other words, Ben was resisting
the OP's ideas. And yet in other words, Ben was not hospitable. So
perhaps 1a and 1b doesn't quite fit the bill since Ben didn't go as
far as call the OP an enemy and he wasn't evil or wished harm to the
OP, but 1c and d(1) are certainly correctly describing his behavior
and to a lesser extent d(2) as well.
And the quarks...... :)
> And that's a fact. ;-)
> Shall we now discuss the nature of the space/time continuum and the
> exact reality of quarks?
Psss, psss, put it down! - http://www.cafepress.com/putitdown
More information about the Python-list