Google Groups + this list
joel.goldstick at gmail.com
Wed Dec 25 13:25:58 CET 2013
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Ned Batchelder <ned at nedbatchelder.com>wrote:
> On 12/24/13 8:47 PM, rurpy at yahoo.com wrote:
>> On 12/23/2013 09:12 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> you haven't answered the other part of the post, the more important
>> Refresh my memory please.
> Ugh, stop! We get it: you don't think Google Groups is bad. Or you think
> it can be made to work, or something. That's fine. But you are going to
> have to reason a little more subtly than, "all software has bugs."
> As Chris has pointed out, the bugs in Google Groups affect every reader of
> the list. Bugs in other software don't, at least not to the same extent.
> Rurpy, you seem to be willfully ignoring the aggravation people are
> experiencing. And people who hate Google Groups: you seem to be
> overlooking the fact that it's difficult for the users of Google Groups to
> understand its flaws, or to see the effect it has on the list.
> I'll repeat my proposal (for everyone):
> 1) Don't fault newcomers for using Google Groups. Politely suggest
> alternatives, but only if you are also helping them, or if they have
> already gotten help.
> 2) Be careful how you rail against Google Groups. When you call its
> results "crap" (for example), it can sound like an insult to the poster.
> You mean to refer to Google Groups, but remember you are also referring to
> the poster's words.
> 3) Don't let's get into protracted internal debates about Google Groups.
> It is for the moment at least, an unavoidable part of this list.
> Do you disagree?
> Ned Batchelder, http://nedbatchelder.com
I'm with Ned. Ned you do a great job lowering the temperature here. This
group has lots of signal, but alas lots and lots of noise.
So, even though its not my holiday, Merry Christmas to all of you
knuckleheads, and good people!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-list