Emrah Diril recently asked me this via email:
Steve Yegge mentioned in the comments of his last post that he gets quite a bit of hate directed his way.
Fake51: you underestimate the ability of people to get mad. Some people start mad and just take it out on you. The hating has gradually become a little too much for me.I read the guy's blog too, but don't understand where this is coming from. Some people just have this tendency I suppose.
Do you have a similar experience? I don't see you wanting to quit blogging, so how do you deal with this? Is it just a matter of personality? Are you better able to ignore this stuff?
I answered with one of my favorite quotes from Randy Pausch's Last Lecture:
And when it was all over, one of the other assistant coaches came over and said, yeah, Coach Graham rode you pretty hard, didn't he? I said, yeah. He said, that's a good thing. He said, when you're screwing up and nobody's saying anything to you anymore, that means they gave up. And that's a lesson that stuck with me my whole life: when you see yourself doing something badly and nobody's bothering to tell you anymore, that's a very bad place to be. Your critics are your ones telling you they still love you and care.
Welcoming and appreciating reasonable criticism is the right attitude to have, but it's not the full story. Do I love criticism? Do I seek it out? No. I have many personality deficiencies, but masochism isn't one of them. I don't have fantasies of waking up every day to an R. Lee Ermey browbeating from commenters. Or, maybe I do. I should blog about that.
Criticism, painful though it may be, is still a conversation. It means your readers and listeners are engaging with you, and there's something to learn from following that conversation. Those messages you're broadcasting out into the world are being received, in some form, by someone on the planet. Even if that person is, well .. this guy:
I stopped reading the blog a while a go. Joel explains my reasoning nicely in his latest post.
The mystery of the non-reading Coding Horror reader. Another NP-complete problem, I guess.
If you think something sucks to the extent that it's actively harming the world and you want it to go away, leaving comments to that effect is not the way. I know, because I bear the psychic scars of a million online flamewars, dating all the way back to 300 baud dualup modems and BBSes. I've been doing this a very long time. I've seen what works, and what doesn't.
I'm here to tell you that there is something much more powerful than criticism that you can bring to bear in these situations. Something almost unimaginably powerful in its ability to shape human behavior.
The "just don't look" strategy [is] effective in any situation where someone or something runs on attention. On the web attention comes in the form of links and pageviews so "just don't look" translates roughly into "just don't link or read". If you don't like who's on the cover of Wired, just don't look. If no one talks about her, she'll go away. Think media gossip sites are ruining the web? Don't read them. Leggy blonde conservative got your knickers in a knot? Just don't look. Commenters ruining the internet? Moderate your comments or close them up. If some Web 2.0 blowhard says something stupid, just don't look. Hate blonde socialites? Just. Don't. Look.
I am absolutely sick to death of hearing about Susan Boyle, both in the traditional media and online. Nothing personal, you understand, I'm sure she's a perfectly lovely person. But I don't talk about Susan Boyle, because talking about her gives Susan Boyle power and currency. I just ignore Susan Boyle. I wish I had two brains so I could ignore her twice as hard. I. Just. Don't. Look. And if we could convince enough people to ignore her, she .. disappears. Poof. Like magic.
One of my favorite books as a child was the Great Brain series, the story of a family in rural Utah, set in the late 1800s. In these books, there was a strange punishment the parents doled out to their children when they seriously misbehaved. For a period of a week, or longer -- depending on the severity of the misbehavior -- nobody in the family would talk to, acknowledge, or address in any way, that particular boy. It was called "The Silent Treatment". This didn't seem like much of a punishment to me. In fact, as an introverted kid who loved solitary activities like computers and reading more than anything, it seemed kind of like a .. reward. I couldn't reconcile this feeling with the semi-biographical reality depicted in the books. To the Fitzgerald boys, the silent treatment was the worst possible punishment, far worse than a physical beating. They would go to incredible lengths to avoid getting the silent treatment. As punishments go, it must have been a doozy, though I couldn't quite wrap my geeky, socially maladjusted young head around exactly why.
The silent treatment was a punishment I didn't fully understand until years later in life. That's how you change the world. Not by arguing with people. Certainly not by screaming at them. You do it by ignoring them.
And if you feel strongly enough about me and what I do here, you can begin by ignoring this.
But I have a legitimate comment too. You forgot about the other way to combat bloggers you don't like: annoy the crap out of them until they give up their blogging career. You know, like posting several times in rapid succession.
CynicalTyler on June 2, 2009 12:37 PM> That's how you change the world. Not by arguing with people. Certainly not by screaming at them. You do it by ignoring them.
What utter crap. So if someone on a popular blog posts wrong information about NP-Complete instead of correcting their mistakes so that others reading it see that there are errors you are saying to ignore it. NP-Complete is not some subjective topic, it has formal definition and laws/rules.
Lets take another example. In the past the majority of people believed the earth was flat. So instead of showing them how its round, you are saying ignore them and that will change the world.
*sigh* on June 2, 2009 12:37 PMYou mentioned Susan Boyle.
Thanks for mentioning the Great Brain, a fantastic but forgotten series of books. It would be really "great" if someone like Walden wanted to make a movie out of it. I recently read the first one to my kids (and wife), but the rest are almost impossible to come by, even in libraries.
PRMan on June 2, 2009 12:40 PMI read your blog.s
Chris Mahan on June 2, 2009 12:41 PMI can't consider myself a computer scientist, but more like a webprogrammer. Sure, I program and I solve various problems but hardly or ever do any complicated algorithms or like that.
And propably I suck quite a lot trying to solve them. But somehow there is a need for someone for me who can program and code but aren't this genius math guy. I'm just a ordinary bloke who makes webpages for a living, and that's because I make those better than most people would.
“I stopped reading the blog a while a go. Joel explains my reasoning nicely in his latest post.”
“The mystery of the non-reading Coding Horror reader. Another NP-complete problem, I guess. “
I don’t see the mystery. This guy claims to have stopped reading your blog, sees one of Joel’s posts that confirms his reason for not reading your blog and posts a comment on your blog explaining this. He didn’t necessarily read the post he was commenting on, and even if he did, it wouldn’t contradict the claim to have stopped reading some time ago.
Funny. Nothing saying, "yeah, you got me... I don't know what I'm talking about." Just effectively saying, "stop calling me out on my BS so the people who buy it continue to think I'm real smart!"
Andy Roublev on June 2, 2009 1:03 PMIs Susan Boyle the P=NP girl? Now it all makes sense.
Susan girl is an interesting reference on this blog because she was way over her head in something she could not handle at all. Rings any bells, Jeff?
securityhorror on June 2, 2009 1:16 PM“If you think something sucks to the extent that it's actively harming the world and you want it to go away, leaving comments to that effect is not the way.”
“That's how you change the world. Not by arguing with people. Certainly not by screaming at them. You do it by ignoring them.”
I’m not sure if this really works in the real world, let alone the internet. OK, it might work with people only trying to get attention, but when a site is actively harming the world, or is just mistaken, ignoring it won’t make it go away, it just allows the errors and harm go unchallenged.
And ignoring things on the internet just because they annoy you doesn’t work, as things have a habit of spreading through the internet. Case in point is your reference to Susan Boyle; I’d been doing a good job of ignoring her, until this blog post.
Unfortunately ignoring something doesn't cause other people to become disinterested with it. The reason pop culture crap is so pervasive is because so many people don't want to ignore it.
You can try to ignore Susan, but then someone will mention her in some post on a blog totally unrelated to anything having to do with her.
Damn.
Strilanc on June 2, 2009 1:35 PM@Paul Morriss: that's close to it!
"" ++
seth@mailinator.com on June 2, 2009 1:52 PMIs this some clever way of lashing back at your commenter for calling you out on your lack of, well, correctness in your post yesterday? If so, well done. Telling your readers to shut up and go away if they don't agree with you is always a good way to figure out if you're doing something wrong, and a great check on passing out bad information to an unwitting public.
You were wrong, and they called you out on it, and you didn't even acknowledge you were wrong. There's always going to be someone who can correct you, and odds on it's not /just/ one person. Admit your mistakes instead of telling them to go away - maybe you could learn from them.
If people post angry rants on your blog, that means they actually care enough about what you write to put in the time and effort to comment on it. Arguably, some of the more childish and immature replies don't take all that long to put together, but still, you managed to annoy them enough to cause a reaction, which I personally think is a good thing, regardless of the actual reaction.
As others have pointed out, I think no reaction is the worst response you can get. Wlling to admit it or not, I think anyone who publishes anything (writings, movies, music, art, etc.) do this to get attention and "be seen", so what's the point of nobody sees you or nobody cares about what you're doing?
Most of the time when I read something I disagree with or that upsets me, I take a minute to think about what I may have to say in response to it. If I don't have anything constructive or reasonable to say, I usually just take some time to cool down and get on with my life. After all, ranting off may help you release some steam, but it's not likely to change anything. for example, I doubt this comment will cause anyone to stop writing angry rants on other people's blogs. ;)
Anders Sandvig on June 3, 2009 2:03 AMThe problem of the non-reading reader is quite simple: I suppose it just mean the RSS feed was removed from the reader. But it doesn't prevent "accidental" reading after, for example, a search.
This article is interesting in the light of reading the comments on your last article on cryptography... You got some hash comments there.
I understand they can be hurting, even if they are just words. I appreciate your honesty of not removing them.
BTW, you might not be a cryptography expert (according to some comments...) but you still know much more than me (knowledge is near zero, although slightly above, thanks to you!), and highlighted some important issues. I must not take blindly the code you show (and you actually advised several times to avoid this), but reading the articles... and their comments is enlightening.
So, thanks!
Hey, having some bad comments is still having comments! :-) ... says the one getting like one non-spam comment per year... :-D
PhiLho on June 3, 2009 2:42 AMThe surest way to support something is to oppose it.
Anybody who reads this blog even occasionally should know that Jeff welcomes constructive criticism. So I just don't understand the folks that like to deliberately misread and take statements out of context and then get all up in arms about how much of a stupid, ugly, doody-head is Atwood (and how anybody who disagrees is just a vacuous mouth-breathing sycophant). It just seems so pointless.
The (or maybe a) point of this post is to remind of us something we all already know: Don't feed the trolls. Of course, I'm not really helping by commenting on the comments for a thread that's already been Godwin'ed, but such is life. ;)
@Dennis Forbes - see http://xkcd.com/386/
Chucklehead on June 3, 2009 2:50 AMJeff:
I like how your comment on the non-reading-reader's comment (which linked to Joel's post) mentioned NP-completeness.
Nice (assuming it was self-referential, subtle humor)
David J on June 3, 2009 3:02 AMOf all people I expected you to be the last one to mention Susan Boyle....
You're not ignoring her eh ...
-Sigh-
I love this blog. I do, however violently disagree with this post.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)
So if the world were to say "We don't agree with the Nazis, let's just ignore them.", the world would be a better place?
Have the courage to stand up. Speak out against injustice. Disagree and start and a discussion!
Dissent is a natural and healthy component to complex system. Without it, you risk creating positive feedback loops that spin wildly out of control. The negative feedback is what keeps the system in check.
Come on Jeff, hang in there...
BenW on June 3, 2009 3:58 AMI think people have misunderstood you and thinking that the popularity you have got is because you are so damn smart. It's not like that - it's that you have a interesting angle on things and can write stuff about software development way more better and more entertaining..
.. than those über-smart believing sort of computer scientistique blokes..
Gandalf on June 3, 2009 4:19 AMtrue jealousy and criticism is the factor number one measurement of success...
Gandalf on June 3, 2009 4:21 AMWow, Jeff. You're pretty much the only person I've ever seen talking about the Great Brain series. I loved them as a kid too, but it doesn't seem like a lot of people ever read the series.
leetdood on June 3, 2009 4:28 AMHaha come on, dude. You know you wrote about susan boyle because you wanted people who googled susan boyle to find this page, right!
But your point about ignoring is totally valid.
Yaj on June 3, 2009 4:29 AMIs this 'Coding Horror' or the 'Dilber.com Blog' ?!
I would save a lot of time reading if they were combined...
Phil Brooks on June 3, 2009 4:55 AMI've ignored almost all forms of sport for the past 2 decades and it hasn't made any difference.
I just don't find grown people chasing around after balls or people running, cycling, driving, swimming, jumping or throwing that entertaining. If I did, I'd do it myself instead of watching other people do it.
I have a trigger finger on the channel button as soon as something even slightly "sporty" is mentioned on TV or Radio. And why is it still reported in the "News". I never got that - if anyone was interested in the sport they would have watched or recorded it, the only people who learn about sports results from the news or news paper are those people who weren't interested in the first place...
That's my Susan Boyle melt down...
Philip on June 3, 2009 5:13 AMWonderful article, thank you very much.
Tomas on June 3, 2009 5:19 AMI heard a radio interview with Johnny Depp once, and the interviewer mentioned having seen a bad Depp movie, and the audience was laughing at a part that was supposed to be serious, and Depp said good naturedly, "Well, at least it's a reaction!"
This is the way I think of it:
If you're annoyed with the signal-to-noise ratio of the internet, the only way of changing things is to add more signal. You'll never reduce the noise, and responding to it only ever adds to it.
Matt Gibson on June 3, 2009 6:45 AMThe silent treatment does work, but only if lots of people do it. Its effects are additive.
One person ignoring you doesn't really do much. A whole load of people ignoring someone will make them think "hang on... what's happening?".
See, if someone's prattling incorrect nonsense on the Internet, ignoring them is the right thing to do. If you so much as mention a website with crazy ideas on people will go and visit it just to look. And that means pageviews. And pageviews are the main way of testing your popularity on the web.
And I now see there's some captcha on this blog :)
James on June 3, 2009 6:52 AM@Phillip, you sound like a pretty fun guy to hang out with ... ...
captcha: controversy sensing
Charles on June 3, 2009 7:09 AMI'd agree but I think there is a difference between ignoring an individual person (who has a limited reach in influence) or ignoring flatly wrong "printed" advice (that forever has a home on the internet)
Captcha blows... I'm certain I'm typing this correctly... or I just can't read it :)
webdev_hb on June 3, 2009 7:35 AMfor god sakes write a post about google wave
Anonymous on June 3, 2009 7:47 AMI think I should buy a new computer, my computer has lost sound so I can't hear Susan sing.
Theo on June 3, 2009 8:39 AM> if we could convince enough people
Functionally equivalent to impossible.
Vance on June 3, 2009 9:11 AM"That's how you change the world. Not by arguing with people. Certainly not by screaming at them. You do it by ignoring them."
I'm confused. I hope you're not saying that ignoring problems makes them go away.
Brian on June 3, 2009 9:21 AMSpeak out against injustice - yes.
Ignore evil going on - no.
Point out errors - yes - but try to be vaguely civil about it.
Fire off ad hominem attacks over someone's *opinion*, where there is no evidence of a single dead kitten - get a life.
Being mixed up about the stack and the heap or NP completeness is not evil.
There is no injustice going on here, just infotainment.
If you want it to go away, move along.
Nice reference to the Great Brain. I was starting to think I was the only one who ever read those books.
Dan McCann on June 3, 2009 9:33 AMSusan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle
ztopitnow on June 3, 2009 9:36 AMBy not expressing your opinion about something either in the form of voting, arguing, or commenting. Then you are essentially agreeing with the way things are and do not want to see any change.
This is of course alright with things like blogs, but in areas like politics, or really anything where things are not going to go away no matter if there is only one person paying attention, ignoring might not be the best advice.
Warren Parks on June 3, 2009 11:28 AMI find it slightly amusing that Jeff hasn't commented. Scratch that, I find it completely hilarious.
Silly on June 3, 2009 11:57 AMSusan Boyle is credited with creating Boyle's Law. You know, the one about the relationship between pressure and volume of a gas at a fixed temperature.
Jimbo on June 3, 2009 12:07 PMJust letting you know - I'm one more person out there not ignoring your blog.
Brian on June 3, 2009 12:51 PMWhat does kottke have against blondes? Two of the things they don't like are blonde people.
Practicality on June 3, 2009 12:59 PMOH MY GOD! Is this what you teach your children?
"Son, fuckit- there will always be people spreading false information, there will be people misusing their power. You just give them a silent treatment. Dont bother screaming at them. THEY WILL NEVER CHANGE. All you can do is look the other way and hope that the gullible dont fall into the trap".
The first step to change is pointing out the problem. That is how you change the world.
Jeff YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF. PLEASE PLEASE DONT SPREAD WRONG INFORMATION. if you just shut up, you would be helping a lot of people. have some heart and common sense man.
Random User 2 on June 3, 2009 1:03 PMSeriously everyone... calm down.
genghis on June 3, 2009 1:16 PMTalking about Susan Boyle doesn't give the _real_ Susan Boyle "power and currency", it just feeds the media artifact. The real Susan Boyle is currently in a mental institution, burnt out by all the sudden attention. I'm sure she would be more than happy if you and the rest of the world went back to ignoring her.
Dave Griffiths on June 3, 2009 1:17 PMThe Just Don't Look works great with TV and radio.
Commercials? Poof, gone. Takes a bit of training to zap back at the right moment for the news, but worth it. Just muting TV commercials is already great - you just have to teach yourself to keep it up and deal with the weird looks everyone else's giving you.
Rob Janssen on June 3, 2009 1:42 PMI have to agree that ignoring people most certainly does NOT fix problems or make them go away. How would the world be today if everyone had just ignored Hitler? Hmmmmm?
Godwin sayz: /thread
Nick on June 3, 2009 1:45 PMShould we ignore North Korea and Kim Jong Il as well, and hope the problem goes away?
Just wondering
jlgosse on June 3, 2009 1:48 PM@Jeff Atwood
Well played sir, well played.
"I'm going to write about ____ and how I wish to ignore this person. I will speak specifically to how mentioning this name gives it strength. Droves of comments will follow, pointing out my 'contradiction' of purpose and foolishness, mentioning this name quite a bit in response to me, secretly strengthening the very point I was making."
Ingenious.
That aside, this absolutely works. I personally feel that the down-voting Jon Skeet mentioned is an additional aspect of this. Essentially turning your attention away from the undesirable and toward the desirable is extremely effective, and up-voting/down-voting to alter visibility is a very useful means of accomplishing this.
"I was once asked why I don't participate in anti-war demonstrations. I said that I will never do that, but as soon as you have a pro-peace rally, I'll be there." - Mother Teresa
(Presumably that's a legit quotation.)
To deviate quite a bit from subjects that interest programmers (but are highly interesting to *this* programmer). I should mention that this concept is extremely strong in the field of hypnotherapy where suggestions are phrased to give attention to the desirable: "I am feeling better and better, relaxed and comfortable in social situations." rather than "The pounding in my head will stop. I won't sweat and be anxious around people." It's additionally in general self-help philosophy including some widespread sectors of "New Age" belief, and cognitive psychology as well (AFAIK).
In my interpretation the very concept Jeff mentions here has been the driving force of my life for over 8 years (I'm a young guy), works extremely well. "Feels good man."
Good post Jeff.
Christopher Galpin on June 3, 2009 1:52 PMI'm trying to ignore Berlusconi...but he does not disappear, damn it :)))
Jeff, any idea and suggestion is really appreciated :)
Keep up the good work
marco on June 4, 2009 3:03 AMThis blog post reminded me of the introductory story in the book "How full is your bucket?" Short book, recommended for anyone.
Lee Grissom on June 4, 2009 4:32 AMI may ignore you, but leggy blonde conservatives and blonde socialites will always still get at least a bit of my time.
Brady Kelly on June 4, 2009 6:30 AMThe trouble is, there are some things I dislike - and, fair enough, these can be dealt with to my satisfaction by ignoring them - and there are some things that I detest - ignoring them doesn't seem enough. Why? Because ignoring them doesn't make them go away, they merely don't affect me directly. But if I truly detest them, I genuinely, altruistically want them to not affect others too.
So "convince enough people to ignore her" becomes important, and how does one do that? Public criticism is the first tool we reach for. Now, such criticism may convince others of the subject's flaws, but it may also encourage them to add their own criticism, complete with additional nuances. So we end up with a huge influx of criticism, which is both undesired content and desired attention. "The only thing worse than being talked about ..."
Oh, and on a tangent, to all those people saying "you're talking about Susan Boyle": no, Jeff is NOT talking about Susan Boyle. He's talking about talking about Susan Boyle. There is a meta-universe of difference.
Bobby Jack on June 4, 2009 6:54 AMT.I. much?
"Never mind what haters say
Ignore em till they fade away
Amazing they ungrateful
After all the game I gave away"
~ T.I. "Live your Life"
For an alternative approach to "how to react to bad comments", you should check Maddox "Hate Mail" at www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net
Damn, I miss the guy's pages :(
Filini on June 4, 2009 10:12 AMMainly, you deserve flames only when you make a blog post about something you would have learned if you'd been classically trained in computer science with a good UNIX basis. While I enjoy your blog, it irks me to no end to see entries that say something like, "Did you know you could pipe the results of one program into another!?! It's crazy! It'll revolutionize your programming!"
That's all. Your Microsoft/VB I-don't-know-C background is a pretty severe handicap for someone writing a computer science blog.
Bill on June 5, 2009 5:04 AM@Bill What makes you think he's writing a computer science blog?
Ed on June 5, 2009 8:40 AMThe Great Brain!
I have been thinking about this series off an on for years, only half remembered from my childhood. I could remember almost no details about it (possibly mormon? sears-roebuck catalogue, love of money, roller coaster in the back yard). On several occasions I tried googling for it, but with the lack of details I couldn't find anything. Two weeks ago I mentioned it to my wife, and then today, catching up on old blogs, I saw 'The Great Brain' and it clicked. Thanks.
Craig on June 7, 2009 5:31 AMFirst they ignore your act of ignoring them,
then they laugh at your act of ignoring them,
then they fight your act of ignoring them,
and then you win in your act of ignoring them.
:-P
Gandhi wins almost everytime, by hook or by crook, mostly crook.
ReverseGandhi on June 8, 2009 4:43 AMFirst they ignore your act of ignoring them,
then they laugh at your act of ignoring them,
then they fight your act of ignoring them,
and then you win in your act of ignoring them.
Does that make sense?
OddGandhi on June 8, 2009 4:44 AMThe whole Susan Boyle madness should not be ignored as its entire existence is utterly absurd. It's real-life Douglas Adams insanity.
The people of the planet "cosy duvet" were so bored of their mundane reality with haggard faces, complex issues and strife they filled their world with picture boxes of untold beauty. Each damsel that sung had a voice of beauty and her visage was equivalent to the voluptuous nature of her voice.
However soon the beauty itself became bland and the people of "cosy duvet" felt restless with the endless manikins of perfection. At this moment a damsel appeared whose beauty of voice was directly in-proportionate to her haggard and rusty features. She was a sensation to them.
And lo, the people of cosy duvet applauded the picture box. They applauded this damsel of dismal features. The applauded the reality they'd previously ignored as novel. They nested their reality within their artificial world and applauded it for being so very different to their artificial world.
In two words: fucking madness.
It's not often you see the most of entire world go insane at exactly same time without realising it. I think it's worth drawing attention to.
I have to go back to Diana's death to see the UK public lose their minds in such a manner. The outpouring of grief was utterly disproportionate and in my mind fucking rude. Most of these people didn't know her as well as they pretended to making their exaggerated grief hollow and worthless.
Of course as soon as one gets angry about these things people think you're attacking Susan Boyle or Diana without realising you're decrying the public's response instead.
Quarrelsome on June 8, 2009 6:51 AMThe whole Susan Boyle madness should not be ignored as its entire existence is utterly absurd. It's real-life Douglas Adams insanity.
The people of the planet "cosy duvet" were so bored of their mundane reality with haggard faces, complex issues and strife they filled their world with picture boxes of untold beauty. Each damsel that sung had a voice of beauty and her visage was equivalent to the voluptuous nature of her voice.
However soon the beauty itself became bland and the people of "cosy duvet" felt restless with the endless manikins of perfection. At this moment a damsel appeared whose beauty of voice was directly in-proportionate to her haggard and rusty features. She was a sensation to them.
And lo, the people of cosy duvet applauded the picture box. They applauded this damsel of dismal features. The applauded the reality they'd previously ignored as novel. They nested their reality within their artificial world and applauded it for being so very different to their artificial world.
In two words: fucking madness.
It's not often you see the most of entire world go insane at exactly same time without realising it. I think it's worth drawing attention to.
I have to go back to Diana's death to see the UK public lose their minds in such a manner. The outpouring of grief was utterly disproportionate and in my mind fucking rude. Most of these people didn't know her as well as they pretended to making their exaggerated grief hollow and worthless.
Of course as soon as one gets angry about these things people think you're attacking Susan Boyle or Diana without realising you're decrying the public's response instead.
Quarrelsome on June 8, 2009 6:53 AMPretty fluffy Jeff, and a little ranty, but you write well, as always.
"I wish I had two brains so I could ignore her twice as hard." -- Gold.
Salespeople often say that "No" is just the first word in a conversation that leads to the sale.
That reflects the mistake humans make all the time: engaging at all, when we would be much better served by just moving on.
I miss orange too.
John Pirie on June 8, 2009 9:56 AMHmm. Well I have trouble criticizing you. Every time I visit this blog I find something highly entertaining and informative. One of the best things to read I found on the internet in a long time.
When ever I find stuff that's not interesting, clearly wrong, I keep it to myself because I figure I'm not qualified to criticize. So I ussually make comments of praise. Which I dont do that often because most stuff on the internets is kind of boring.
pinkturbokitty on June 9, 2009 3:28 AMBy my estimation we have just about reached the point of ultimate repudiation, which is pretty slow progress for a week of comments, but we also have a curious subset of the audience who are travelling anti-clockwise: I wish you well.
If you are a blog reader: your faith in knowledge is cumulative, so learn how many imprints of a particular "truth" you need before you're satisfied that it's a decent reflection of reality. This threshold is your dividing line between entertainment and knowledge.
If you are a blog writer: people either read things because they have to (technical blogs) or because they don't have to (entertaining blogs). More people read the latter, and the good ones point to the former, forming a useful knowledge ladder. However, attacking the former, whether ad hominen or direct, whether justified or not, does not encourage an uninformed reader to want to read your version of the truth. One thing I've yet to see Jeff do is throw his toys out of the pram, yet on nearly every post he makes, there are a series of commenters who do write valuable, technical blogs, who embarass themselves and diminish the exposure of their knowledge by piling in with non-constructive criticism.
Alistair on June 9, 2009 4:16 AMThis only works if you have any meaning for this person. In the case of somebody famous it's very unlikely he/she's caring if you talk about/with him/her or not. So if you as an individual stop reading, nobody is going to notice, except if you say you are going to do it (Which is exactly what the commenter did).
But even with neighbors, if you don't have a very tight relationship, it's unlikely they will care enough to change.
BTW: it's how social rules work and how people are put at shame etc. It's the fear of being excluded.
Doing such a punishment for a kid, as parents are very very important, is very bad for its development.
Somebod on June 9, 2009 9:23 AMYES! Concur on the ignor.And the Great Brain - haven't thought about that book series in a billion years. Got to find it for my kids.
Shamus on June 11, 2009 8:40 AMSupreme irony: I come back to reading your blog after a one-month boycott, and find this (even more irony, if that is even possible: in the meantime I was following Matasano Chargen and didn't even realise their AES post was directed at you!). So I guess you're still worth looking at after all (for now).
Pierre Lebeaupin on June 13, 2009 1:37 PMThanks for mentioning the Great Brain, a fantastic but forgotten series of books. It would be really "great" if someone like Walden wanted to make a movie out of it. I recently read the first one to my kids (and wife), but the rest are almost impossible to come by, even in libraries.
Tom
Tom on June 15, 2009 1:12 PMI actually liked it better when you talked less about Stack Overflow and more about Software Development related matters. I stopped reading for a while because this (about 6 months). I just came back to see if I can find some more interesting articles like the old days.
Brian W on June 25, 2009 3:08 AMI actually liked it better when you talked less about Stack Overflow and more about Software Development related matters. I stopped reading for a while because this (about 6 months). I just came back to see if I can find some more interesting articles like the old days.
Brian W on June 25, 2009 3:09 AMI actually liked it better when you talked less about Stack Overflow and more about Software Development related matters. I stopped reading for a while because this (about 6 months). I just came back to see if I can find some more interesting articles like the old days.
Brian W on June 25, 2009 3:10 AMTiffany Jewellery barely 2-year-old result called Iridesse is set to the more Tiffany Key Rings South Coast Plaza setting was the jeweler’s supreme tome branch stockTiffany Bracelets diamonds are about more than absolute condition, cut and beauty - they are one of our diamonds underscores.Tiffany Sets reputation as a world premier jeweler synonymous with diamonds of the finest feature,” added Bennett.
tiffany jewellery on August 28, 2009 3:29 AMI actually liked it better when you talked less about Stack Overflow and more about Software Development related matter
http://www.istiridye-inci.com
I just came back to see if I can find some more interesting articles like the old days.
sevgiliye hediye on September 13, 2009 1:41 PMGreat post and draw. Thank you for sharing.
wow power leveling on October 21, 2009 7:02 AM
Thanks for your information, i have read it, very good!
Thanks for your information, i have read it, very good!
ed hardy shirts on October 23, 2009 8:25 AMThanks for your information, i have read it, very good!
Very cool! Congrats on the pairing.
street lamps on October 24, 2009 2:45 AMthis is cool, this is what we want dude......
links of london on November 4, 2009 10:28 AMSome people just have this tendency I suppose. Do you have a similar experience? I don't see you wanting to quit blogging, so how do you deal with this
mylinux@gmail.com
useful,i like it!
thank you for your work!!:)
If people ignored the blog because they didn't like it, how would you ever find out what it was that they didn't like? Criticism is an avenue for inciting improvement.
anon on February 6, 2010 11:17 PM"Don't look" is fine for opinions and personality clashes... but IMO it doesn't work for technical articles or Stack Overflow answers, for that matter. Heck, that's one reason we've got downvotes, right?
If I see an answer which suggests doing something which is flawed/dangerous, I'll downvote it and add a comment to explain. Usually, that prompts the user to correct or delete the answer. If it *doesn't* then at least anyone viewing the answer gets to see the problem with it. That, to me, is much better than just ignoring the answer.
Jon
Jon Skeet on February 6, 2010 11:17 PM@Paul: I disagree with your suggestion that there's a necessary correlation between writing well and not digging into technical detail. Some people just write well naturally, it seems.
Eric Lippert is a prime example of this, IMO. His blog (http://blogs.msdn.com/ericlippert/) is *extremely* well written, but also very deep in terms of technical detail. Ditto Joe Duffy.
(And yes, part of the reason for me protesting this suggestion is because I'd like to think *I* can write and dig deep, too :)
Jon
I stopped reading a blog because a Windows enthusiast became a full time Mac user. Kind of changed the whole purpose of the blog.
Brandon on February 6, 2010 11:17 PMBoy, I was sure that "copy/paste GUID" post was satire. But now, I'm not so sure anymore.
anon on February 6, 2010 11:17 PMim having curry tonight. looking forward to it.
Simon on February 6, 2010 11:17 PMGood grief your readers are a bunch of tiresome moaning bitches aren't they?
It's like deliberately driving slowly to annoy a pushy driver behind you- if I was pissing off so many people with that attitude I'd certainly feel like I was doing something right.
Da 'tron on February 6, 2010 11:17 PMhear hear!
people forget nowadays there is an OFF button.
to reverse the Nike slogan:
Just UNDO it
common man on February 6, 2010 11:17 PMDid you actually make an entire post that amounts to "stick your head in the sand like an ostrich"? While giving the example of Susan Boyle and how you're tired of hearing about Susan Boyle and remedy this by not reading anything to do with Susan Boyle or listening to anything about Susan Boyle and certainly don't talk about Susan Boyle yourself Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle Susan Boyle AD REVENUE
P.S. If you can't change something with criticism, it doesn't mean it's fundamentally ineffectual. It just means you didn't do enough damage.
Jon R. on February 6, 2010 11:17 PMThis article is novel, I really love it. I also have some ideas written in my article, you can have a look if you have the interest.usa soccer jerseysWe can also discuss different topics.
The comments to this entry are closed.
|
|
Traffic Stats |