Basic misunderstanding on object creation

[Ned Batchelder]

On Wednesday, May 13, 2015 at 3:46:16 PM UTC-4, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 13/05/2015 19:42, andrew cooke wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 13 May 2015 13:37:23 UTC-3, Terry Reedy  wrote:
> >> On 5/13/2015 9:25 AM, andrew cooke wrote:
> >>
> >>> The following code worked on Python 3.2, but no longer works in 3.4.
> >>
> >> Bugfixes break code that depends on buggy behavior. See
> >> https://bugs.python.org/issue1683368
> >> Your code also fails in 2.7.9 if you inherit Foo from object.
> >> The exact error messages changed for 3.4 in
> >> https://bugs.python.org/issue7963
> >>
> >>   > Did something change,
> >>
> >> Obviously yes.
> >
> > thanks, but why does someone on this group always have to be a dick and make some smart-assed comment like this?
> >
> 
> Please don't bother asking again after that response, especially to 
> somebody with the stature of Terry Reedy.
> 

To my ears, "Obviously yes" is a pedantic smart-ass comment.  It added
nothing to the answer, other than to point out that the question was
obvious. Essentially, it said, "you are silly."  I don't think it's
unreasonable to expect the regulars here to be able to answer politely.

I certainly don't think Andrew's behavior in this thread is cause for
asking him not to return.  I also don't think "people with stature"
should be allowed to behave in ways that others would not be allowed.
And how are newcomers expected to identify "people with stature"?

Email can be a harsh medium, lacking social cues that can soften
interchanges in other arenas.  We all have to try hard to be kind to
each other.  And yes, I expect more of the regulars than I do of
people new to the list.  The regulars set the tone.  They are the
hosts here, and should be doing what they can to make new people
feel welcome.

--Ned.

> -- 
> My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
> what you can do for our language.
> 
> Mark Lawrence