From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19108 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2010 14:44:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 19092 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jul 2010 14:44:09 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,TW_CG X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-ww0-f45.google.com (HELO mail-ww0-f45.google.com) (74.125.82.45) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:44:04 +0000 Received: by wwf26 with SMTP id 26so353968wwf.2 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 07:44:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.44.6 with SMTP id y6mr257915wbe.17.1280414637487; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 07:43:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.99] ([82.6.108.62]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e31sm804299wbe.17.2010.07.29.07.43.54 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 29 Jul 2010 07:43:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C5198A6.6020903@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:44:00 -0000 From: Dave Korn User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "exeunt left, pursued by an angry mob" Subject: Re: Constructive criticism References: <20100728001415.GD4000@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <4C50E8DD.3010806@gmail.com> <20100729055532.GA18691@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> In-Reply-To: <20100729055532.GA18691@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2010-q3/txt/msg00008.txt.bz2 On 29/07/2010 06:55, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 03:35:09AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote: >> On 28/07/2010 01:14, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 07:55:14PM +0100, Andy Koppe wrote: >>>> Darn, dropped the punchline: >>>> >>>>>> Your code is 100% bogus and should be taken out the back, >>>>>> lined up against a wall, and machine-gunned. >>>>>> >>>>>> Then the bleeding corpse should be hung, drawn and quartered. >>>>>> >>>>>> Then burnt. >>>>>> >>>>>> Then the smouldering rubble should be jumped up and down on. >>>>> By a hippo >>> Oh boy. That brought back memories. I guess I'm glad I'm not the >>> object of the discussion though. >> Clearly, I was too subtle in that reply. It doesn't seem that anyone in >> that thread was distinguishing between criticising someone's code and >> criticising the person themselves. Oh well, never mind. > > I'm certainly well aware of the distinction but it's not one that I've > had much luck with myself. > >> Well, I'm too busy to care right now anyway, I've got a whole bunch of >> parents that I have to go and tell that their babies are ugly! > > Wait! Dave! Stop! > > Oh boy. I'll bet it's too late. > > cgf Actually, it all went rather well, considering. There was an awkward silence for a moment, but then someone else spoke up and said that he'd thought so too, but hadn't wanted to say anything for fear of hurting their feelings. Then the guy from the QA dept. said that actually that might explain why the baby had failed in some of their tests, and then the Marketing guy said that they had had some negative consumer reaction to the baby in their polling, but they hadn't highlighted it in their report because ... well, everyone already hates Marketing anyway, and before you know it it turned out that pretty much everyone had been thinking the same thing but nobody was saying it. Even the parents were agreeing that they'd kind-of known it really, but didn't want to admit it to themselves... ... It was all going fine until I told them to "Plan to throw one away, you will anyhow". cheers, DaveK