Seconding.
I saw it as a miscommunication.
If someone asks a question, and the first answer literally is just “I don’t know.” then that’s a pretty bad post.
If the answer wasn’t really indicating a lack of knowledge, but instead was stating what was known but couched in a common idiom that happens to start with those words, then it really isn’t.
Seems some were insistent on taking it the first way, even though that is absolutely nonsensical to do so.
If it was “absolutely nonsensical”, multiple people wouldn’t read it that way.
But like I said, I think it was way more the “you’re a shitty parent” bit that was the trigger.
It may be a US centric idiom, it may be that people get entrenched in their oppositional thinking. Hard to say why people are misrepresenting it, but it was quite obvious what the intent was.
He said that? I must have missed it. I will agree that saying that someone is a shitty parent is inappropriate for FQ.
ETA: Huh, went back to the thread, and still don’t see where he said, “you’re a shitty parent”.
You really want to play this silly game?
I do see this as a judgement on parenting:
“Also, I think it may send the wrong message to a seven year old that poking around in some things is fine (safe). Maybe this one is, but the next one may not be and he will have no reason to think he shouldn’t do that.”
Which seems pretty shitty to me. The whole point of the thread was verifying whether there was a risk. Lecturing safety to someone who is clearly already concerned about it (hence the thread) is an asshole move, whether that was the intention or not.
I’m in the US, and it sounded to me like Whack didn’t know if it was safe. Maybe he “idiomatically” meant he was guessing it wasn’t safe, but FQ isn’t the place for guesses.
I can see why 6_8 got irritated. He reacted poorly, but the first response was unhelpful and judgmental.
I don’t see the idiom being used here, either.
I read it as WaM literally saying he didn’t know whether or not the PSU would retain a charge. And then he followed that with advice (which is, of course, opinion, not fact) about erring on the side of caution. I understand why he would give that advice, being concerned about the kid.
But I also think that Sicks_Ate would have been entirely justified if he’d just replied back: “I wasn’t really asking for parenting advice. Just information on whether the PSU could still contain a charge.” It really wasn’t an FQ-style answer.
And, yes, I also see why Sicks_Ate would read the advice as a criticism of his parenting—even though I also think WaM intentionally tried to word things in a way to avoid that. (Hence the “I” speak about what he would personally do.)
I mean, I don’t know what game you are proposing playing, but most likely not.
Do you really think that your silly games facilitate communication in any way? If someone offers an attempt at clarification, at helping understanding, is your knee-jerk hostility something that’s going to help there?
Or does it just get people to shut down communication and dig in?
I saw it as good safety advice.
The “lecture” you just gave me is longer than the advice that was given in that thread. It may have been a touch off topic for FQ, but it wasn’t stitty or accusing them of being a shitty parent. It was just good advice.
Let’s say someone started a thread that said, “I’m about to hand my child a gun, how do I tell if it’s loaded or not?” You don’t think that some “advice” may be given?
I took it to mean that he didn’t know if this particular PSU was safe, there is no way to know that. But if indicated the factual information that PSU’s in general are not safe.
It’s weird. My last interaction with Whack-a-Mole left me pretty irritated with him, I don’t owe him anything, and I’m inclined to take what he says in the worst possible light. And yet, that response was perfectly fine. It was helpful, in that he pointed out that even a power supply unplugged for months can hold a charge, and it was only judgmental to someone looking to be offended.
Once a friend of mine asked if I wanted to meet him at the park to take our dogs for a walk. I said, “I think it is going to rain.” He said, “Well, if it does, then we’ll just cut our walk short.” I replied, “I’m sorry, what I meant to say is, I checked the weather forecast, I know that it is going to rain, and that going to the park would be a waste of both of our time.”
People couch stuff in less absolutist language all the time, both for brevity and politeness. I can’t believe this is the first you all are hearing about it.
The one you’re clearly already made the first moves in, the “didn’t say those exact words” bullshit game. Fuck off with that stupidity, it’s transparent crap.
…says the person who starts off playing the stupid fucking game first.
Is that what you call accusing people of "misrepresenting " and being “absolutely nonsensical” to be? Motherfucking helping? Listen to your fucking self. No wonder you can’t see WaM’s post for what it was, you don’t recognize hostility when it’s not in your fucking face and you’ve couched it in nice words without swears. Well, it’s in your face now.
If the advice is something about how a child will be scarred for life by being at a gun range, yeah that’s being a bit of an asshole. And your example is a poor one. It’s not like Sicks_ate was being clueless about computers, they were asking a specific question about PSU capacitors.
A better analogy would be if there was a pistol with an arcane loading mechanism and the poster was trying to be cautious to verify that there was a safe way to verify that the breach was clear, and looking for a factual answer. If the response was a warning about exposing children to guns, I’d say that poster could fuck right off. That’s not the place for it.
If it weren’t Whackamole, I might admit just such a construction. But it’s not not Whackamole.
I do think 2/4/6/8 over-reacted, but agree with @Atamasama that it was in response to a (reasonably polite) dig. WaM tends to have a very aggressive posting style, and if it were not the case, I probably would be more willing to give the benefit of the doubt as I think k9 is.
That being said, the response was much more intense than the provocation was. And most of us seem to be going “Wow, that was out of character.”
Of course, I just got over my own overreaction, so I’m not going to throw too many stones…
Absolutely. I honestly don’t even think that WaM was intending to be offensive, but it definitely came off critical to me. The response was worse though, and I still think that Sicks_ate was just having a bad day.
Just in case there was something I was unaware of or not remembering, I checked the BBQ Pit for previous instances of people complaining about 6 and/or heated interactions here, and instead found some interesting and thoughtful posts. So yeah, pretty out of character.
To be clear, it’s not the first I’m hearing of the idiom you are talking about. I just don’t read WaM’s post as using that idiom. But I also don’t think whether he used the idiom or not changes the meaning all that much.
And I agree with the last two posters.
Now, now, you’re all being absolutely nonsensical, and misrepresenting WaM.
Local transphobe YWTF has been notified that the next straw will be the final one (anti-wokeism thread in GD).
I really really don’t see why she’s getting yet another chance. Her only participation on this board, for more than a year, has been to whine about trans rights and about leftists who aren’t as transphobic as her, and to try to sneak around her topic ban. She’s a waste of bandwidth.
I got mod-noted for attacking her when I paraphrased her own argument. Not seeing it, but whatever; I think I need to be better about not feeding her trolling appetites.
Does she even post in other threads? MPSIMS? Cafe? Other debate topics unrelated to lefties not being transphobic enough?
I agree. Deliberate misgendering of a specific person when you are already topic banned.