edit: For what it's worth, if you can't see that this language is rude or think it is somehow acceptable for people of a certain caliber to talk this way - you're also probably toxic.
edit: For what it's worth, if you can't see that this language is rude or think it is somehow acceptable for people of a certain caliber to talk this way - you're also probably toxic.
As someone in my early 30's who grew up on message boards/gaming the language he is using is fairly mild. I think we just have very different social norms.
That’s an extremely low bar. Nobody would bat an eye about a random person speaking like this on a gaming Discord or a message board.
Posting public messages as a public figure with an audience to a company is not the same as Call of Duty voice chat.
If it were on x it would seem fine.
Personally, I prefer direct language if it gets to the root of the problem quicker. It's more pragmatic. You just have to pick your audience, because some people get offended by it. But the most productive discussions I've had have been arguments where you can both quickly find the holes in each other's positions, and then move forwards from there. As long as no one is taking it personally, this is very effective.
OTOH, I've been in many meetings where people talk around a problem for an hour, never reaching the conflict about what their disagreement actually is. To me, that is much more frustrating than someone risking offending someone by being direct. But it really depends upon the people you work with and the team you have.
> If you want a dataflow graph compiler, build a dataflow graph compiler. > This is not 6 layers of abstraction, it's 3 (and only 2 you have to build).
This is direct and pragmatic. It states the writer's justified true beliefs and opinions as plainly as possible.
> Plz bro one more stack this stack will be good i promise > bro bro bro plz one more make it all back one trade type beat
This is just toxic. The writer is making assumptions about other people's position that he does not (and probably could not) substantiate.
Ironically, sprinkling in toxic comments and back-handed insults in any piece has the effect of making said piece less direct and pragmatic.
Only like 4 lines of what geohot said are problematic. Would it be better if they weren't there? Yes. But, it's also not as egregious as you and that throwaway account make it out to be. It's more just annoying.
Who's the people of a certain caliber? Are there people who can talk like this and others that are better people which shouldn't? What weird thing to say.
Yucky!
Georgie hotsth u r yucky and tocthic!