I don't think this conversation is going in a productive direction. (My opinion doesn't enter into this; I'm speaking as one of the community moderators. I prefer not to bring that into discussions, but I don't want this to keep going.)
Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include: (...) Trolling, insulting/derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks.
@stereobooster
, I appreciate your responses throughout. In the future, it may be more constructive for yourself and everyone else to click the three dots (...) and select Report Abuse, so the moderation team can review and take appropriate action.
What they hate is being looked down on, being sneered at, which naturally suggests that it's a way to go.
This attitude turns down a lot of people from functional programming. You know this, right?
As well, I don't see how that approach changed Bob Martin attitude at least a bit. He keeps going, and this media coverage only increases his audience.
anti-vaxxers, flat earthers, white supremacists, clean coders.
There was some "internet drama" in React community recently. It started with a very similar claim. (This is shouldn't bother you, just a fun fact)
My PoV is that there are some bad actors which can't be argued (maybe they do it intentionally, maybe not - doesn't matter), and some people which are got in bad influence and "can be saved". I believe that the number of bad actors is much less than "innocent citizens". And we should try harder to convince people and explain why bad actors are wrong.
When I say that you should use rational arguments instead of assaults I don't hope that bad actors will hear you, I hope that "innocent citizens" will be like "🤔hey they are right, vaccine indeed stopped smallpox".
Comment marked as low quality/non-constructive by the community. View Code of Conduct
This attitude turns down a lot of people from functional programming. You know this, right?
Did I ever say that FP is a form of quackery?
As well, I don't see how that approach changed Bob Martin attitude at least a bit.
Quacks don't change. Their core base don't change. The only thing you can do with the quacks is to let all the innocent passers by know how sneered upon the quacks and their gullible fans are, so they won't be tempted to join their ranks.
and some people which are got in bad influence and "can be saved".
I used to think this way too. Got way more cynical since then, upon not seeing a single example of anyone being "saved" by a rational argument.
I hope that "innocent citizens" will be like "🤔hey they are right, vaccine indeed stopped smallpox".
And what they really think is: "look, those egg heads are arguing with anti-vaxxers seriously, there must be something there after all".
I don't think this conversation is going in a productive direction. (My opinion doesn't enter into this; I'm speaking as one of the community moderators. I prefer not to bring that into discussions, but I don't want this to keep going.)
@combinatorylogic , we need to debate ideas, not people. @stereobooster is correct calling this out. Please refer to the Code of Conduct. I've quoted three specific points below:
@stereobooster , I appreciate your responses throughout. In the future, it may be more constructive for yourself and everyone else to click the three dots (
...) and selectReport Abuse, so the moderation team can review and take appropriate action.Let's end this thread here.
This attitude turns down a lot of people from functional programming. You know this, right?
As well, I don't see how that approach changed Bob Martin attitude at least a bit. He keeps going, and this media coverage only increases his audience.
There was some "internet drama" in React community recently. It started with a very similar claim. (This is shouldn't bother you, just a fun fact)
My PoV is that there are some bad actors which can't be argued (maybe they do it intentionally, maybe not - doesn't matter), and some people which are got in bad influence and "can be saved". I believe that the number of bad actors is much less than "innocent citizens". And we should try harder to convince people and explain why bad actors are wrong.
When I say that you should use rational arguments instead of assaults I don't hope that bad actors will hear you, I hope that "innocent citizens" will be like "🤔hey they are right, vaccine indeed stopped smallpox".
Did I ever say that FP is a form of quackery?
Quacks don't change. Their core base don't change. The only thing you can do with the quacks is to let all the innocent passers by know how sneered upon the quacks and their gullible fans are, so they won't be tempted to join their ranks.
I used to think this way too. Got way more cynical since then, upon not seeing a single example of anyone being "saved" by a rational argument.
And what they really think is: "look, those egg heads are arguing with anti-vaxxers seriously, there must be something there after all".
Scroll up and read my last comment (two ago).
End this here please. Thank you.