Anonymous user
User talk:Paddy3118: Difference between revisions
m
→some general comments of too-quick task deletions and more: corrected three misuse of words.
m (→some general comments of too-quick task deletions and more: added a line break.) |
m (→some general comments of too-quick task deletions and more: corrected three misuse of words.) |
||
Line 1,836:
I do believe that the deletion of tasks should be discussed first. <big>But ... </big>
I have had a discussion (not fruitful nor pleasant) about the uniqueness of recently entered (draft) tasks and their value (on being on Rosetta Code) and it did not go well for the lone Indian. When challenged, the discourse just got inflammatory, along with strawman arguments, and silly ('''So?''') rebuttals, and the stating of opinions as facts, and the use of capitalized use of supposedly shouting <big> '''is completely besides the point''',</big> whenever I try to make a point which is either disagreed upon or dismissed, and so on and so on and ... Rosetta Code (discussions/talks) has become a pretty unfriendly place, and in my opinion, toxic. Yeah, I know, I know, a strong word. Whenever challenged, the challenger just doubled-down, and went downhill from there. I had entered a solution to the draft task ''Similar words'', and it was summarily deleted, along with the (draft) task. I think that that (draft) task definitely had a uniqueness to it and wasn't just another version of finding an '''xxx''' string in a list of words in a dictionary. Far from it. As a matter of fact, the other deleted tasks also had their merits, but there is no sense in me trying to defend those merits, as defending something (lately) just means the defender gets rebuffed with a lot of sarcasm and acidic rhetoric ... and worse. If one can't have a polite discourse on the merits of a task without all that vitriol and ad-holmium attacks, then why bother having "talk" discussions? Something has to be done (or should be done). Not to mention that someone needs to define what "spam" is so that term is used correctly. Not to mention janitorial services. A janitor doesn't throw the furniture out, just the dust and junk on the floor. I think the use of words like "dump" (does it really matter if someone adds draft tasks at a certain speed?) is so condescending and judgemental. ... And the use of words like "vomiting", "low quality", and numerous other words/phrases of that ilk. And the statement of opinions as fact ... hard to argue with a closed mind (or gawd-like). These are some of the reasons (regarding wording and phrasing and "it's true 'cause I say it's true ...) that I call toxic to opening a discussion. It may appear to anyone that the wording is toxic, but it doesn't sink home unless YOU get defamed, then it's a story of a different color). I fear that this sort of rhetoric will quell (or discourage) others from joining it or offering/opening a new discussion. Why have to suffer the slings and arrows from offering one's opinion on a Rosetta Code discussion? I wish I could go on and write about some of the (draft) tasks that were deleted. Each task had (bless their departed souls) their merits and different ways/methods of solving them (not to mention their solutions), and it wasn't just variants of find '''xyz''' words in a dictionary. Some were ''like'' anagrams, others needed a somewhat different method(s). Every chef, er, ... programmer can bring a new recipe for solutions here at (old) Rosetta Code. For what I've observed, the discussion of deletion of tasks is like asking five wolves and a sheep on what's going to be for supper? (<strike>Deleting</strike> Voting on tasks isn't a democracy. Ya can't <strike>execute</strike> delete someone by counting votes. There ''should be'' a discussion/debate). There are always people who think word searches are all alike. Well, they ain't. Anyone who thinks otherwise should be <strike>banned</strike> blocked for a week or more. Boy oh boy!! That'll teach 'em from trying to to participate in the culture at Rosetta Code!! --- By the way, I wish <u>any</u> other dictionary would be used that mimics a true dictionary: duplicate words, capitalization (God and god), word phrases, hyphenated words, etc.). Someone actually said, the '''xxx''' word isn't in the unixdict.txt (or whatever it's called) file, so it isn't a word (!!!). OMG! Having ALL words in lowercase defeats the purpose of a dictionary. Searches should be caseless, unless specifically requested that they be not. At this point, I might as well rant a bit (with my tongue <u>firmly</u> and humorously in cheek). Why have all those (vomited?) types of sorts? You've seen one type of sort if you've seen 'em all. Does Rosetta Code really need all those types/categories of sorts? My oh my, the sorts! The sorts!. All those sorts!! And all those kinds of primes. Yikes! And all those types of sequences. To borrow a phrase: '''Sheesh!!''' (Use of the that exclamation should prove my point beyond all possibility of any and all rebuttals ... 'cause I said so). And all those types of trivial '''DO/FOR''' loops. I wonder what Dr. N. J. A. Sloane thinks or all those thousand and thousands and thousands of integer sequences in OEIS. Oy veh!! The mind boggles on what a janitor with unlimited power (or ego) could do. End of silly rant. Well, at least I feel better. None of the above needs responding, that way I can actually think I made a point or two. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 02:51, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
:* These discussions, were they deleted too?
Line 1,850:
Gerard, please see [http://rosettacode.org/wiki/User_talk:Thundergnat#Task_deletions this] reply from Thundergnat. He explains the task is from a "serial dumper" leading to his actions. If so, then the root problem is that serial dumper. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 10:37, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
:: Yes, I had already read it, and yet I wrote all this. But, I believe the real root problem is: ''deleting tasks without adequate discussion and/or warning should not be done''. The baby got thrown out with the bathwater. Wait, where have I read that? If everyone agrees (two people, three people?) that it was a case of "serial dumping", then it is what it is. Can't argue with that logic. But, I want to hear anything/something from the other side first. Calling it "dumping" is part of the problem. And, to top it off, it was "serial". Maybe we should call it very sudden stupid and mindless serial dumping unto innocent Rosetta Code victims of nearly identical tasks with nearly exactly the same programming solutions taken from a maze of twisted and twisting passages, all alike. Oh my. Oh well, I sympathize with the guy <strike>banned</strike> blocked (even for a few days). It makes it hard to have a discussion with a guy who can't give his side, and I have a suspicion that English is his second (or third) language, and that he may have a hard time expressing himself adequately, or maybe he doesn't feel it's worth the effort to explain his motives or actions (heaven knows how that can work out, I can attest it does no good). But once <strike>banned</strike> blocked, I doubt that he'll be forth coming. I remember my first foray at Rosetta Code, I knew not of what templates were (that could be used to flag an incorrect programming solution (as I had never seen a flag at that early time at Rosetta Code), nor did I know where people were trying to contact me on my user page, which I really didn't know existed. Thankfully, Michael Mol wrote me an e-mail (very politely and courteously worded, that guy has got class) clued me in where things were. That was a little over a decade ago. Any-a-whose, just a thought as I have no proof either way ya look at it. Just ignore my stuff (above), it's just like a fart in the wind. (Nice movie, made in 1939.) Gone in a few seconds, and nothing is noticed. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 12:09, 9 December 2020 (UTC))
|