mcantor

The problem isn't that it's too abundant. The problem is that people make excuses for it every time it happens, instead of just saying, "Yeah, that was really verbally abusive."

I agree with you. The problem I'm seeing in this thread relates to this point:

> There could be a debate about what constitutes verbal abuse, on a case by case basis. And that would turn into a mess.

Right now, a lot of people simply do not make the distinction between verbal abuse and direct language. In other words, they are arguing that we should not bother discouraging verbal abuse because it "shouldn't" affect targets any more adversely than direct but non-abusive language.

I guess it's a debate one can approach from many angles. But maybe you're right, perhaps focusing on highlighting why one thing constitutes verbal abuse and others don't is too semantic of an argument, and it's more productive to focus on the fact that just because one person has never been truly bothered by verbal abuse doesn't mean that should be the universal expectation.

This post was about grown men, not fourteen-year-olds. Grown men... as in, people who should know better.

I can't imagine using shame as my primary motivator for improving my work.

"Offending" and "verbally abusing" are not the same thing.

This debate exists on a spectrum of gray areas, but I'm pretty sure "you should be retroactively aborted" crosses the line from "shaking someone's cage" to "flagrantly excessive verbal abuse", if for no other reason than it equate's the target's worth as a human being with their skill as a developer, which is obviously not a healthy viewpoint.

Genuine question: Did you read the article? I feel like the author's main point is that there seems to be a higher abundance of toxic interactions in Open Source than other communities.

Hadn't heard of nvim until today.

Can anyone sell me on this project? I looked at the homepage and README, but they're both pretty hand-wavey.

What problems does nvim solve for experienced vim users?

It's not a choice if you can't afford it or are turned down.

This is true, but who has the time and energy to fight every stupid Kafkaesque battle like this?

It's to incentivize buyers to Buy It Now.

If you know that Buy It Now disappears as soon as someone bids, then you're more likely to Buy It Now because if you don't Buy It Now, you can't buy it later; you can only bid on it later, and then you might not get it. So if you want it, eBay wants you to Buy It Now.

Buy It Now.

Wow. It never occurred to me that when you provide a service like that, someone could use it to literally ruin Christmas.

That is heavy.

The author filtered on questions with accepted answers only.