*cough* *splutter* 
urm... Marnen, I perceive the vast majority of your posts as veering toward strongly uncivil in their tone. I don't mean to say that to insult you personally; just to point out that you often tell people in no uncertain terms, without embellishment, very flatly, that they are "wrong"; sometimes for even asking the question they asked. Often times, when you do suggest solutions, it's difficult to discern the "help" from the "sneer".
Michael Pavling wrote:
I think it's a guru thinking that it's all right to be uncivil if you know enough -- an opinion I do not really subscribe to
*cough* *splutter*
urm... Marnen, I perceive the vast majority of your posts as veering toward strongly uncivil in their tone. I don't mean to say that to insult you personally; just to point out that you often tell people in no uncertain terms, without embellishment, very flatly, that they are "wrong";
You bring up some interesting points here.
First of all, do you really think telling people they are wrong is ipso facto uncivil? I do not. I don't really think anything is gained by avoiding the issue.
I am aware that I tend toward the blunt side when I write my responses, but I think there's a huge difference between that and the rather mean-spirited tone that I recall noticing the last time I read ESR's essay.
I certainly don't think "civil" is the same as "sugar-coated"; I aim for the former, not the latter, on this sort of list. However, I make every effort to respond to posts on this forum in a way that would not offend *me* if I were the recipient rather than the author of the post -- for example, you will not see name-calling or ad hominem attacks in my posts, and I make suggestions constructively wherever possible. OTOH, if someone obviously doesn't know what he's doing, I see no point in not (politely) pointing out that that's the case.
Of course, I realize that everyone's sensibilities are different.
sometimes for even asking the question they asked.
Examples?
Often times, when you do suggest solutions, it's difficult to discern the "help" from the "sneer".
Examples?
If you want a guideline: it is vanishingly rare for the "sneer" to be intentional in my posts. This is part of what I am referring to as civility. I just don't do that unless fairly heavily provoked, and usually not even then.
Best,
Michael Pavling wrote:
I think it's a guru thinking that it's all right to be uncivil if you know enough -- an opinion I do not really subscribe to
*cough* *splutter*
You bring up some interesting points here.
First of all, do you really think telling people they are wrong is ipso facto uncivil? I do not. I don't really think anything is gained by avoiding the issue.
No, I agree that there isn't necessarily a causal relationship between correction and lack of civility.
I am aware that I tend toward the blunt side when I write my responses, but I think there's a huge difference between that and the rather mean-spirited tone that I recall noticing the last time I read ESR's essay.
I can't comment on a comparison, as I don't recall reading any of the essays.
I certainly don't think "civil" is the same as "sugar-coated"; I aim for the former, not the latter, on this sort of list.
That's fair enough, and nice to hear.
for example, you will not see name-calling or ad hominem attacks in my posts
Absolutely, and I'd even add, that when people start on you, you don't just tit-for-tat back.
OTOH, if someone obviously doesn't know what he's doing, I see no point in not (politely) pointing out that that's the case.
Of course, I realize that everyone's sensibilities are different.
That's the rub; if you look at the times you've been railed on, it's due to a reply that wasn't interpreted as being that polite.
Examples? Examples?
I wish I could give some; I had a quick look in the archives, but
since you post from Ruby Forum, there's no quick way to filter just
your posts. I've probably got some threads way down in my inbox, but
don't want to dwell on it too much.
I tell you what; next time it all kicks off, we'll dissect it 
If you want a guideline: it is vanishingly rare for the "sneer" to be intentional in my posts. This is part of what I am referring to as civility. I just don't do that unless fairly heavily provoked, and usually not even then.
*I* know that But all I'm saying is that a lot of other people
seem to not get that, and it was just your claim to "an opinion I do
not really subscribe" that made me spray coffee on my keyboard!
PS Please don't anyone think that I'm accusing Marnen of anything I'm probably not worse at; being uncivil and short with people who ask poor, easily Googled questions.