what do you get with 1 divide by 998001, interesting results

[Terry Reedy]

On 8/21/2014 12:50 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Ben Finney wrote:
>
>> Everything You Need To Know <eyn2k at outlook.com> writes:
>>
>>> I guess I have to agree and was mistaken, though vitriol I found
>>> unnecessary and unproductive!
>>
>> You've behaved obnoxiously, as has been pointed out.
>
> People can point out anything they like, it does not mean it is necessarily
> so. Adam ("Everything You Need To Know") has perhaps posted unwisely and
> clumsily, but obnoxiously?
>
>      Obnoxious (noun):
>      very offensive; hateful; odious; reprehensible.
>
> What did Adam do that was *obnoxious*? Here are some of the accusations
> thrown at him:
>
> - his "fancy" video is too simple for the "skilled Python programmers" at
> this forum and is "barely original";
>
> - he posted using a "self-aggrandising name" instead of his "real name";
>
> - he posted a link to another website (oh the horror!!!);
>
> - his post is "spam" (commercial, unsolicited advertising);
>
> - he posted as a member of a group instead of an individual.
>
> And that's pretty much it.
>
> I reject any suggestion that Adam's post is "obnoxious" or that it is spam.
> It is clearly on-topic. Frankly, I am ashamed at the closed-minded
> hostility demonstrated here in this thread. Ben, I believe that your
> behaviour goes against the spirit of the Python Community Code of Conduct,
> if not the actual letter of CoC. Can you honestly say that you have been
> Open, Considerate, and Respectful in telling Adam that his post
> was "obnoxious" and that his post is "not appropriate" just because it is
> hosted on YouTube?
>
> This is supposed to be a welcoming place. Does anyone think we as a
> community have been welcoming to Adam?
>
> - We jumped down his throat for a couple of minor social faux pas, like
> failing to sign his post with a name.
>
> - We displayed the most odious double-standards: we attacked Adam for
> posting on behalf of a group, but when members of the PSF or the Python
> core developers make an announcement or post speaking for those groups, we
> accept their right to do so without question.
>
> - We allow long-time community members to link to external forums, we accept
> them including links to their own blogs and websites, but accused Adam of
> being a spammer because he linked to an on-topic video hosted on YouTube.
>
> - We've made the most egregious and unjustified generalisations, speaking
> for others without their consent, by insisting that "most" of us here are
> too experienced to care for Adam's post. I'm an experienced Python
> programmer, I've been contributing here and on other forums for over a
> decade, and I learned something new from Adam's video.
>
> Earlier, I posted on how Adam could have, *should* have, engaged with us.
> But we should have engaged with him too:
>
> - we should have assumed good faith, instead of accusing him of being a
> spammer;
>
> - we should have been welcoming, instead of exclusionary and elitist;
>
> - we should have given him constructive criticism for his video, since it is
> on-topic, rather than being so carelessly dismissive;
>
> - or even just ignored it, if you don't like instructional videos;
>
> - we should be respectful of people's right to prefer video over text, as
> misguided as I personally believe it to be, some people like it;
>
> - and we should be forgiving of minor faux pas and gaffes, rather than going
> on the attack as we did.
>
> Adam, for myself, I am sorry that we allowed a few mild gaffes on your part
> lead to such a hostile reception for you, but please have a belated
> welcome.

Thank you for posting this Steven. As a list admin, I pretty much agree 
with everything you said.  Some people are caught in a negative feedback 
cycle and all should step out of it and stop.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy