Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:23:46 -0500, Rocco Moretti wrote: > > >>Professionals (and even decent hobbyists) don't >>escalate flame wars, even unintentionally. > > > You don't get out much, do you? *wink* > > If your comment is meant to be _prescriptive_ rather than _descriptive_, I > don't entirely agree. > > Flame wars, like all wars, are unproductive beyond a certain point, but to > push the combat analogy, punitive raids can be productive at changing > behaviour. > > It is never pleasant to be on the receiving end of a flaming, but if it is > deserved, then people should accept it and learn from it, rather than just > dismiss it as a flaming and therefore meaningless. > > The problem on the Internet is that there is little or no status: the most > ignorant newbie and the stupidest AOLer think that they are equal in > status to somebody who has proven their knowledge for ten years. (This > lack of status on the Internet is not *always* a bad thing, but it can be.) > > If your boss or professor or a judge gave you a tongue-lashing for stupid > behaviour, sensible people accept it. "I've been bad, I got caught, thank > goodness I'm suffering nothing worse than being told I'm an idiot." At > worst they might complain to their friends afterwards. > > But on the Internet, people who deserve that tongue-lashing think that > because they can retaliate, they should retaliate -- and that's where the > risk of escalation from punitive raid to unproductive flame war lies. > > > your wierd. i dont mean that in a bad sense but your the first the person to i have seen who think in internet does not have a status quo. i newbie is classified as one from his first post in any mailing list or forum.(in fact most forums siply give you that status according to you post count.
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
