Don't Post Passive-Aggressive Webpages
dontpostpassiveaggressivewebpages.com
dontpostpassiveaggressivewebpages.com
Hate to break it to you, but shaming and ridiculing is always the intent when I use those types of links.
Let me read the error message for you. The error message says what is wrong. The one that you posted (to your credit). It’s right there.
Or they say that they don’t know what is wrong. And they don’t indicate that they have tried anything. But the error message says what they can try. And you point that out.
I don’t think they are incapable of reading error messages. They just want it to go away. And they want exact steps to make it go away and make whatever command not give them output they don’t want. So you explaining for three paragraphs what this means and why the suggestion in the error message might be something they should do or not—stop. Just give them one single command to run. Don’t worry that the situation is ambiguous and in turn “how to fix” is ill-defined without any followup.
This website talks about kindness. The thing is that whoever subjects themselves to these questions (for whatever reason) don’t get much kindness at all. For predictable reasons; the questioner says “thanks” and moves on, and then a week later the same kind of person shows up and asks the same question. For all intents and purposes they are the same persona here with the same knowledge. Does this persona have the knowledge required to be a kind questioner? No they don’t. Those are the predictable parts; they don’t know what they don’t know, and they certainly don’t know that these people have been answering the same question to the same persona twenty times.
Then these people take a step back and rather than initiating the eight-step procedure of torturing more info out of them than “it gives error”—which will not enlighten the world at all since the next person will be just as clueless—, they say, “you know there is a wider context here and you are a pain in my arse”.
What? No. The intent is to lightly mock the user and point out that they are asking a leading/epiplexis question. Maybe the other person thinks higher of you than they should and maybe you really didn't understand the point they're making, but from my perspective that is what is usually happening.
E.g. better-auth uses dosu, if you see their GitHub discussions
The point of these is that it is a widespread annoyance. No, it's not nice to send someone a link to nohello.net, but it is letting them know that you are annoyed.
If every time someone Slacks you "Hello", you send this link, you're probably an asshole. If you send this to your boss, or to senior people in your org, you are a moron.
But everyone knows the serial "hello"-ers, and if you tell them nicely "Please just ask your question", they will just say "Yes of course", and then do the exact same thing next time. By sending the link, you are telling them, YOU ARE ANNOYING ME, without having to be so direct as saying something like, "If you Slack "hello" to me while I'm working outside of my hours on a customer deliverable one more time I will lose it with you".
It _is_ a shaming. It _is_ a talking down to. It is saying "get a clue".
But I have slack conversations that are just "Hello" - "Hello" (weeks pass) "Hello" - "Hi" (days pass) "Hello" - "Hi".
They do not have a specific question for you. They are looking for someone to dump their work on, and they pick whoever lets them know they are available, by replying
excuse the passive aggressive form of this comment
lmfgtfy.com is an active joke/taunt usually used by the knowledgeable person against a lazy person. There is no attempted deniability or hiding the joke.
This toxic positivity trend disguising itself as genuine kindness is leading to the HR-ification of everyday life.
My biggest complaint about this site is “no duh” lol I can’t imagine there’s a single person out there who has ever linked lmgtfy that genuinely thought they were being helpful.
Do unhelpful responses sometimes get leveraged against people genuinely just asking for help? Sure. But people also ask questions in bad faith, and it's a perfectly valid choice to respond in kind.
I've never sent an lmgtfy link to someone asking a technical question, but the "can you actually cite one vaccine that is proven to have saved lives" people get one.
Otherwise, the best course of action is the simplest: ignore/downvote/report and move on. You’re better off spending your energy and wit actually helping people who are there in good faith.
We don't all have to give a response optimized to be "best".
It all boils down to what you want out of the situation ultimately.
I don't think passive aggressiveness rises to the level of "shitty" behavior, and that's my entire point; people have turned anything but HR-approved, company rep-like responses into being shitty behavior.
The elimination of emotion (of which annoyance and exasperation are two kinds) from online discourse as a means to attempt to signify who is more correct is bad.
"Using lmgtfy makes you shitty" is ridiculous levels of tone policing.
I guess my question is: what is the point of sending a lmgtfy link? What do you want to happen?
I don’t think this is tone policing tbh unless we call any time someone says “stop” tone policing. In which case I’d say I guess I support some light policing.
It's cathartic.
> I don’t think this is tone policing tbh unless we call any time someone says “stop” tone policing.
If you're telling someone to 'stop' something that is innocuous because you just don't think it's 'productive', then it absolutely is tone policing, and it's not your place to decide what people can say.
Either way you’ve answered my question, have a good one man.
Saved you the ten bucks you spent on the domain registration.
Maybe I should create a passive-aggressive webpage about sites that don't check their formatting on different screen sizes? ;)