bad behaviour and manipulation

[John Reimer]

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 20:17:42 -0800, David B. Held wrote:

> John Reimer wrote:
>> [...]
>> Why do I persist?  
> 
> Why give peace a chance when fighting is so much more fun? ;)
> 


Fighting?  No.  Clarification? Yes. 


> Now, allow me to say a thing or two.  I always thought it interesting 
> that Andrei was able to toss Latin phrases into his CUJ columns myself. 
>   I assumed he had a phrasebook handy or just took Latin in school or 
> something; but the answer is much more mundane than that.  I hope he 
> will not be too upset for spoiling his "secret", but the fact of the 
> matter is that Romanian is almost indistinguishably close to Latin, 
> which is to say, for all intents and purposes, Latin is Andrei's first 
> language.  So, although it is a fortunate coincidence for him that a 
> language so near his native tongue is considered "learned", in reality, 
> dropping Latin phrases is no different from a Spanish speaker using 
> Spanish in a signature (and I've seen plenty that do).


Really... A lot of languages inherit from Latin to some degree or another
:P ; I'm not impressed with that excuse since I have conversed with many
English-speaking Europeans throughout the last few years in this D
group (Larsivi, Tom S., and Frank B. Hello! :) ). Incidently, I
have no way of knowing whether what you say is true about Romanian being
THAT similar to Latin; even dialects of languages can be so /disimilar/ as
to be unintelligible amongst each other). Please don't tell me that
Andrei, with all his academic background doesn't realize what "dropping a
Latin phrase" amounts to in this day; from his writing I gather he feels
he has lots of common sense and doesn't feel any sort of lack of
confidence in the issue. Did you actually interpret the Latin? Can you
tell me what he intended by that phrase? What motivated him to use that
particular Latin phrase after that particular post, when he is so adept in
English prose to write magazine columns? I really don't know the answers
to these questions. But why the ill-timed signature at this critical
juncture in the discussion? Perhaps I should act the poet and do more
guesswork into the message that Andrei was trying to get across? Hrmm...
probably not wise lest I read even more ill into this, right? That's
exactly why I considered it ill-conceived, and the translation a
perplexing retort to the discussion.


> This is the danger of assuming you know the person you are talking 
> about.  Often times, you don't.  This is what I mean by "differing 
> backgrounds breed misunderstanding."  They really do.  Guess what? 
> English is not Andrei's first language!  It is a testament to his 
> linguistic skills that he speaks it so fluently most people would never 
> have guessed it to be so.  But every once in a while, he is at a loss 
> for the proper English word to express his thought.  It is a rare event, 
> but a subtle reminder that he is a man with two brains...one speaking 
> Latin, and another speaking English.  But his Latin brain is the one 
> informing his English brain, and not the other way 'round (like for most 
> of the rest of us who might be lucky enough to speak Latin).


Of course "differing backgrounds can breed misunderstandings."  Please,
please don't use this excuse for Andrei.  I DO NOT KNOW Andrei, that
is true. But my prior posts point out the manner in which he treats certain
people here or his manner in pursuing argument seems ill-motivated for
several reasons which I've discussed.  A person that is picking out
spelling and grammar errors in native-English speakers sentences is NOT
struggling with the language (or maybe it's just gleeful practice for a
non-English speaker? Is that the next excuse? I've never heard of such a
thing!). The fact that he can spend time writing voluminous posts tells me
that he is NOT struggling with the language (especially if he is as busy
a person as I imagine he is!).

I've seen others struggle with cultural and language differences, and I
assure you that it becomes clear when that is the problem. In this
situation, you are making it worse by trying to defend him this way. 
Incidentally, I too suffer from a loss for English words while I write...
often! :P


> Yes, there have been tensions and recriminations on all sides here, but 
> let's put things in perspective...it *is* possible for there to be 
> innocent misunderstandings based on subtleties of meaning.  And as 
> someone who knows Andrei personally, I will testify that despite his 
> passion for excellence, he is not out to steamroll anyone who gets in 
> the way.  And on the very rare occasion that he picks the wrong side, he 
> will admit he made a mistake and change his mind.  You simply haven't 
> witnessed it because statistically speaking, you haven't seen him in 
> action long enough for it to happen.


*sigh*. Yes, it is possible to have "innocent" misunderstandings.  This is
not the case here.  Which is the wrong side?  Which is the right side? 
Andrei can pick whichever side he wants, and I have absolutely no
problem with that. He'll contribute many good ideas in the process. His
experience with C++ are welcome, and his ideas for solutions that D may
implement are quite possibly excellent. He is here to contribute valued
ideas, that hopefully propel D forward. I admire that.  But to say
somebody is rarely wrong... man... I can't argue with that :P. "Wrong" is
not always about technical merit; we're talking about being fair and
unfair here. That's what I'm getting at.

 
> Guess what?  Do you think Andrei hates Tango?  No, he doesn't.  Does he
> think it could improve?  Yes, in the way that every library ever written
> could improve, including Loki.  And when I offered to work on a piece of
>   Loki and told him: "Look here, this is busted", did he say: "No!
> You're absolutely wrong!  Loki is PERFECT!!!  Handed down to me by God
> Himself on the top of Mount Sinai!"??  No, he didn't.  He said: "Oh,
> you're right.  Let's fix this."  And we did.  Not only that, but he
> immortalized the defect in his very own CUJ column.  Have you ever
> published an entire article on a mistake in one of your libraries?
> 


Glad to hear that he can admit a mistake.  Don't you think he had a
motivation to fix it and then to publicise the fix in a column? Why
wouldn't he want to fix a library that might be so evident to the public
eye? Do you think the library users like "busted" code? ;) Now, I am NOT
questioning his character here. I am merely pointing out that this example
really doesn't prove anything, nor should it, nor does it have to. 

We read Andrei by how he presents himself here, limited view or not.  I'm
satisfied that you are a loyal friend of his and can see a lot of good in
him; I'm sad that we don't get to see that aspect of him in the same way,
except through your eyes alone. For his and your sake, though, I'll
endeavor to think of him more favourably. But never do excuses like above
remove an individuals responsibility. We must all take responsibility for
the actions we take.

Incidentally, I never suggested that he hated Tango; I have not the
slightest clue what he thinks about Tango, nor is it relevant or important;
that's not an issue here. I DID question his motivations and intentions
for influencing Tango directions because of the manner in which he
presented his case. That is important.

Nor did I ever make out that Tango is PERFECT. You don't appear to have any
idea at how receptive the Tango developers have been to /solid/ outside
input. Have you been paying attention to the amount of discussion going on
about Tango? Have a look at the forums and other threads here. There are
plenty of constructive contributions, and Andrei is welcome to continue
contributing those ideas like everyone else. A ticket system and wiki page
are all available for this sort of thing.  And Andrei would show
common courtesy to use these systems if he is interested in helping the
effort in the direction he deems as "right".  Is that kind of common
courtesy considered "culturally" significant? Is it difficult for him
to understand? If so, I guess the suggestions to that effect on several
occasions didn't help him comprehend that point; I am not sure how to
surmount that cultural hurdle.


> Needless to say, Andrei has no problem with admitting he's wrong.  It 
> just happens to be a rare event.
> 


Glad to hear it.  Wish I could see it happen.  It seems the problem must
exist only in this community then.


> I think the personalities involved here are all too pround and wound up 
> to apologize, even though the only injury here was pride.  So if you, or 
> anyone, are waiting for an apology from anybody, don't hold your breath. 
>   It's just too unlikely to happen.  That is why I feel it is best to 
> have said your piece and move on.  If you really want to see a schism in 
> the entire D community, go ahead and give this horse a few more 
> clubbings.  It's too dead to notice.  But then take responsibility for 
> the consequences.  That is all.


Pride. It's always just that simple, isn't it?  Nobody every has a valid
concern apart from it?  Yes, pride often plays a big role in our lives, but
I assure you this confrontation is about flagging a very unusual critique
approach that is not helping an effort. I don't need an apology, never
asked for one, and am only frustrated to see how posts like this appear to
manipulate the problem into something else.

D has gone through much more severe "schisms" before, so please don't try
to threaten me that way. It will stand up to this, don't worry.  You,
no doubt, know that I've weathered many prior incidents here, right?
If we limit this all to misunderstandings and perspectives, there will
never be any complete resolution. That's the way people want it, and
perhaps that's the way they'll get it.

All of your message was written to vindicate Andrei from all "allegations".
Why? There was no need.  I made it clear on several occasions that I do not
know Andrei.  All I know is what I read in his threads, and I gave a clear
indicator to him that his manner of dealing with some issues and people are
making him look bad and should be changed.  He should never have taken it
personally from a person who knows nothing more about Andrei than what he
presents about himself in this community. I was somewhat surprised to see
his reaction: very simple logic indicates that my view was limited
to his online persona.  Mine was a critique of that alone. His decision to
take my assessments as dreadful attacks on his hidden character were
ill-founded, and actually made me wonder more that I must have touched
some nerve of truth; the other alternative was to presume that he was not
really personally offended and had posted his response like so just to
manipulate the situation more.  Either way, it didn't look good. Perhaps
this situation should just be disregarded as another example of cultural
differences? That's sad logic indeed.

I've had enough of this. "Last word" is not the intention and matter's
little. I only wish that all this gets cleared up soon. Andrei is welcome
to his opinion as always, and I hope he's as resilient as the many others
in the D community have proved to be.

All the best,

-JJR