Joachim Durchholz wrote:
> Pavel Lepin schrieb:
>> Stefano Perna <ajajajajai@tin.it> wrote in
>> <4642d209$0$4794$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it>:
>>>> Since you don't seem to know SQL at all, I would
>>>> recommend getting some sort of introductory book and
>>>> reading it first. Meanwhile hope your team leader doesn't
>>>> find out you're not up to snuff.
>>> In any case, I think you should learn a little
>>> more about good manners.
>>
>> Dear Sir,
>>
>> How kind it is of you to point out my awfully bad manners to
>> me right after receiving some free advice
>
> Communication in a newsgroup isn't broadband enough to give you enough
> information to judge the other person, yet you insist that you can judge
> him anyway. Inisisting on gratitude that came over as rudeness adds on
> top of that.
> I don't know the technical term for this kind of attitude, but it's most
> certainly not "good manners".
>
> Regards,
> Jo

Jo,
I agree with you. Name calling and/or accusations of any sort have no
place anywhere specially in a setting such as Usenet.

As far as a technical term, I am sure there are out there but we just
don't know them.


--
lark -- hamzee@sbcdeglobalspam.net
To reply to me directly, delete "despam".

Pavel Lepin schrieb:
> Joachim Durchholz <jo@durchholz.org> wrote in
> <f1v4l9$hs$1@online.de>:
>> Pavel Lepin schrieb:
>>> Stefano Perna <ajajajajai@tin.it> wrote in
>>> <4642d209$0$4794$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it>:
>>>>> Since you don't seem to know SQL at all, I would
>>>>> recommend getting some sort of introductory book and
>>>>> reading it first. Meanwhile hope your team leader
>>>>> doesn't find out you're not up to snuff.
>>>> In any case, I think you should learn a little
>>>> more about good manners.
>>> Dear Sir,
>>>
>>> How kind it is of you to point out my awfully bad manners
>>> to me right after receiving some free advice
>> Communication in a newsgroup isn't broadband enough to
>> give you enough information to judge the other person, yet
>> you insist that you can judge him anyway.
>
> Pardon me, 'judge him'? Can you please explain what you
> could possibly mean? My stating that his knowledge/skills
> in the field seem nonexistant?

Exactly.
In a technical newsgroup, it's one of the stronger offenses.

> Could you perhaps point out
> to him that he shouldn't judge my manners on a basis of
> just one post?

There's a difference.
Manners are immediately visible.

> Could you perhaps point out the same thing
> to yourself?

I'm judging your manners as shown.
I'm not implying anything beyond newsgroup behavior (nor are they
particularly relevant).

>> Inisisting on gratitude that came over as rudeness adds on
>> top of that.
>
> I don't believe I insisted on OP having to express his
> gratitude to me in my posts.

You did:

>>> How kind it is of you to point out my awfully bad manners
>>> to me right after receiving some free advice

> In my opinion, the OP clearly demonstrated in his posts that he
> doesn't know a thing about MySQL.

In my opinion, you're basing a very broad statement on a very narrow
amount of information.

> I gave him what I consider the best advice
> under the circumstances--to read an introductory
> book/tutorial on the matter. After that I remarked that his
> team leader might not like the fact that he's dabbling in
> something he's not qualified for; and that he doesn't seem
> to *try* to become qualified.

More assumptions.
Even the assumption that he has a team leader is unwarranted. That
advice could have been totally irrelevant. (It wasn't, but you didn't
know when you posted.)

> In response, the OP said I
> should learn good manners. You seem to know what he meant
> by that, so could you please explain to me what kind of
> response he expected?

Yes.

> Would that be a three-page "Joins
> 101" lecture, despite the fact that such lectures can be
> easily found in precisely the introductory reading I
> recommended, and despite the fact that OP's understanding
> seems limited enough that perhaps it would be better for
> him to start with lectures on even more basic
> concepts,--and, mind you, such lectures can be easily found
> in precisely the introductory reading I recommended.

Post a URL, with a keyword or two on the content so the OP has a rough
idea whether following is worth it.
Post the answer to the question, or at least give those keywords that he
needs for a Google search (but try the keywords yourself before doing
that - sometimes there's too much noise in the signal and the search
results are useless).

In other words, if you think the OP didn't do his homework, then the
same applies to you :-/

Oh, and if you think "that's too much work", then simply do not answer.
After all, telling everybody what you think about the OP's background
isn't particularly interesting to anybody; we're all intelligent enough
to use a computer and *should* be intelligent enough to rate the
questions on our own.
If you really think the OP should be told about this kind of thing, mail
him in private. If you have a feeling that it's not worth it, go ask
yourself why posting to the newsgroup is so much more fun - at least for
myself, once I found out that the it was a kind of dark pleasure that
came from the ability to publicly humiliate people, I immediately
decided I didn't want to become *that* kind of person and stopped it
(this exchange still has traces of it, which is why I'm not going to
continue this for long).
I kindly ask you to check your heart whether a similar mechanism might
be at work in it. And to check whether you want to be that kind of
person, too. Then, please, decide :-)

> I seriously don't get it. What did I do wrong to deserve
> a "thank you, you disgustingly rude person" response from
> the OP?

You sprayed about around four unjustified assumptions, of which one
happened to be true but irrelevant.
All assumptions were the opposite of flattering to the OP, which made
them rude to the OP.

None of them answered the question he was asking, so they were also an
entirely unnecessary waste of mental bandwidth for everybody following
the exchange (including the OP).

Hope this clears a few things up.

Regards,
Jo

On May 10, 7:59 pm, Joachim Durchholz <j...@durchholz.org> wrote:
> Pavel Lepin schrieb:
>
>
>
> > Joachim Durchholz <j...@durchholz.org> wrote in
> > <f1v4l9$h...@online.de>:
> >> Pavel Lepin schrieb:
> >>> Stefano Perna <ajajaja...@tin.it> wrote in
> >>> <4642d209$0$4794$4fafb...@reader4.news.tin.it>:
> >>>>> Since you don't seem to know SQL at all, I would
> >>>>> recommend getting some sort of introductory book and
> >>>>> reading it first. Meanwhile hope your team leader
> >>>>> doesn't find out you're not up to snuff.
> >>>> In any case, I think you should learn a little
> >>>> more about good manners.
> >>> Dear Sir,
>
> >>> How kind it is of you to point out my awfully bad manners
> >>> to me right after receiving some free advice
> >> Communication in a newsgroup isn't broadband enough to
> >> give you enough information to judge the other person, yet
> >> you insist that you can judge him anyway.
>
> > Pardon me, 'judge him'? Can you please explain what you
> > could possibly mean? My stating that his knowledge/skills
> > in the field seem nonexistant?
>
> Exactly.
> In a technical newsgroup, it's one of the stronger offenses.
>
> > Could you perhaps point out
>
> > to him that he shouldn't judge my manners on a basis of
> > just one post?
>
> There's a difference.
> Manners are immediately visible.
>
> > Could you perhaps point out the same thing
>
> > to yourself?
>
> I'm judging your manners as shown.
> I'm not implying anything beyond newsgroup behavior (nor are they
> particularly relevant).
>
> >> Inisisting on gratitude that came over as rudeness adds on
> >> top of that.
>
> > I don't believe I insisted on OP having to express his
> > gratitude to me in my posts.
>
> You did:
>
> >>> How kind it is of you to point out my awfully bad manners
> >>> to me right after receiving some free advice
>
> > In my opinion, the OP clearly demonstrated in his posts that he
> > doesn't know a thing about MySQL.
>
> In my opinion, you're basing a very broad statement on a very narrow
> amount of information.
>
> > I gave him what I consider the best advice
>
> > under the circumstances--to read an introductory
> > book/tutorial on the matter. After that I remarked that his
> > team leader might not like the fact that he's dabbling in
> > something he's not qualified for; and that he doesn't seem
> > to *try* to become qualified.
>
> More assumptions.
> Even the assumption that he has a team leader is unwarranted. That
> advice could have been totally irrelevant. (It wasn't, but you didn't
> know when you posted.)
>
> > In response, the OP said I
>
> > should learn good manners. You seem to know what he meant
> > by that, so could you please explain to me what kind of
> > response he expected?
>
> Yes.
>
> > Would that be a three-page "Joins
>
> > 101" lecture, despite the fact that such lectures can be
> > easily found in precisely the introductory reading I
> > recommended, and despite the fact that OP's understanding
> > seems limited enough that perhaps it would be better for
> > him to start with lectures on even more basic
> > concepts,--and, mind you, such lectures can be easily found
> > in precisely the introductory reading I recommended.
>
> Post a URL, with a keyword or two on the content so the OP has a rough
> idea whether following is worth it.
> Post the answer to the question, or at least give those keywords that he
> needs for a Google search (but try the keywords yourself before doing
> that - sometimes there's too much noise in the signal and the search
> results are useless).
>
> In other words, if you think the OP didn't do his homework, then the
> same applies to you :-/
>
> Oh, and if you think "that's too much work", then simply do not answer.
> After all, telling everybody what you think about the OP's background
> isn't particularly interesting to anybody; we're all intelligent enough
> to use a computer and *should* be intelligent enough to rate the
> questions on our own.
> If you really think the OP should be told about this kind of thing, mail
> him in private. If you have a feeling that it's not worth it, go ask
> yourself why posting to the newsgroup is so much more fun - at least for
> myself, once I found out that the it was a kind of dark pleasure that
> came from the ability to publicly humiliate people, I immediately
> decided I didn't want to become *that* kind of person and stopped it
> (this exchange still has traces of it, which is why I'm not going to
> continue this for long).
> I kindly ask you to check your heart whether a similar mechanism might
> be at work in it. And to check whether you want to be that kind of
> person, too. Then, please, decide :-)
>
> > I seriously don't get it. What did I do wrong to deserve
>
> > a "thank you, you disgustingly rude person" response from
> > the OP?
>
> You sprayed about around four unjustified assumptions, of which one
> happened to be true but irrelevant.
> All assumptions were the opposite of flattering to the OP, which made
> them rude to the OP.
>
> None of them answered the question he was asking, so they were also an
> entirely unnecessary waste of mental bandwidth for everybody following
> the exchange (including the OP).
>
> Hope this clears a few things up.
>
> Regards,
> Jo

Hang on. Rewind. He wasn't THAT rude, and he DID answer the question,
and, although he expressed it perhaps a little too forcefully, he did
have a point! I think the a little more magnanimity on the part of the
OP would have been appropriate.
In fact, a little more magnanimity all round wouldn't hurt. Bush, if
you're reading this...

Joachim Durchholz wrote:
> Pavel Lepin schrieb:
>> Joachim Durchholz <jo@durchholz.org> wrote in
>> <f1v4l9$hs$1@online.de>:
>>> Pavel Lepin schrieb:
>>>> Stefano Perna <ajajajajai@tin.it> wrote in
>>>> <4642d209$0$4794$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it>:
>>>>>> Since you don't seem to know SQL at all, I would
>>>>>> recommend getting some sort of introductory book and
>>>>>> reading it first. Meanwhile hope your team leader
>>>>>> doesn't find out you're not up to snuff.
>>>>> In any case, I think you should learn a little
>>>>> more about good manners.
>>>> Dear Sir,
>>>>
>>>> How kind it is of you to point out my awfully bad manners
>>>> to me right after receiving some free advice
>>> Communication in a newsgroup isn't broadband enough to
>>> give you enough information to judge the other person, yet
>>> you insist that you can judge him anyway.
>>
>> Pardon me, 'judge him'? Can you please explain what you
>> could possibly mean? My stating that his knowledge/skills
>> in the field seem nonexistant?
>
> Exactly.
> In a technical newsgroup, it's one of the stronger offenses.
>

Not at all. In fact, it's some of the best advice he's gotten.

> > Could you perhaps point out
>> to him that he shouldn't judge my manners on a basis of
>> just one post?
>
> There's a difference.
> Manners are immediately visible.
>

Yep, and your lack of them is, also.

> > Could you perhaps point out the same thing
>> to yourself?
>
> I'm judging your manners as shown.
> I'm not implying anything beyond newsgroup behavior (nor are they
> particularly relevant).
>

Pot - Kettle - Black.

>>> Inisisting on gratitude that came over as rudeness adds on
>>> top of that.
>>
>> I don't believe I insisted on OP having to express his
>> gratitude to me in my posts.
>
> You did:
>
> >>> How kind it is of you to point out my awfully bad manners
> >>> to me right after receiving some free advice
>
>> In my opinion, the OP clearly demonstrated in his posts that he
>> doesn't know a thing about MySQL.
>
> In my opinion, you're basing a very broad statement on a very narrow
> amount of information.
>

Nope, look at the thread. In his very first post the op showed a lack
of understanding of even a basic SELECT with COUNT. Then he came with
questions about sorting the results (ORDER BY). Both are items I would
expect anyone with even a basic knowledge of SQL to know.

Then he finally admits:


>> oh, thanks very much:
>> being a newbie, I could not understand it very easily.


> > I gave him what I consider the best advice
>> under the circumstances--to read an introductory
>> book/tutorial on the matter. After that I remarked that his
>> team leader might not like the fact that he's dabbling in
>> something he's not qualified for; and that he doesn't seem
>> to *try* to become qualified.
>
> More assumptions.
> Even the assumption that he has a team leader is unwarranted. That
> advice could have been totally irrelevant. (It wasn't, but you didn't
> know when you posted.)
>

Nope, no assumptions. Unless he's a one-person shop (which he obviously
isn't), he has someone in charge. That person may be a team leader,
project manager or whatever title you want to give him. But there's
someone there.

> > In response, the OP said I
>> should learn good manners. You seem to know what he meant
>> by that, so could you please explain to me what kind of
>> response he expected?
>
> Yes.
>
> > Would that be a three-page "Joins
>> 101" lecture, despite the fact that such lectures can be
>> easily found in precisely the introductory reading I
>> recommended, and despite the fact that OP's understanding
>> seems limited enough that perhaps it would be better for
>> him to start with lectures on even more basic
>> concepts,--and, mind you, such lectures can be easily found
>> in precisely the introductory reading I recommended.
>
> Post a URL, with a keyword or two on the content so the OP has a rough
> idea whether following is worth it.
> Post the answer to the question, or at least give those keywords that he
> needs for a Google search (but try the keywords yourself before doing
> that - sometimes there's too much noise in the signal and the search
> results are useless).
>

Sometimes just answering the question is the WORST thing you can do for
someone.

> In other words, if you think the OP didn't do his homework, then the
> same applies to you :-/
>

Nope, Pavel did his homework.

> Oh, and if you think "that's too much work", then simply do not answer.
> After all, telling everybody what you think about the OP's background
> isn't particularly interesting to anybody; we're all intelligent enough
> to use a computer and *should* be intelligent enough to rate the
> questions on our own.

Or, better yet - do EXACTLY what he did - try to show the op how he can
help himself.

> If you really think the OP should be told about this kind of thing, mail
> him in private. If you have a feeling that it's not worth it, go ask
> yourself why posting to the newsgroup is so much more fun - at least for
> myself, once I found out that the it was a kind of dark pleasure that
> came from the ability to publicly humiliate people, I immediately
> decided I didn't want to become *that* kind of person and stopped it
> (this exchange still has traces of it, which is why I'm not going to
> continue this for long).

There is nothing wrong with doing this on the newsgroup. Others can
learn from this, also.

OTOH, your posts in this thread are pure crap and no one will learn from
them. Maybe YOU should be the one responding by email. Take your own
advice!

> I kindly ask you to check your heart whether a similar mechanism might
> be at work in it. And to check whether you want to be that kind of
> person, too. Then, please, decide :-)
>

Hey - if you don't like it, ignore it.

> > I seriously don't get it. What did I do wrong to deserve
>> a "thank you, you disgustingly rude person" response from
>> the OP?
>
> You sprayed about around four unjustified assumptions, of which one
> happened to be true but irrelevant.
> All assumptions were the opposite of flattering to the OP, which made
> them rude to the OP.
>

And you have contributed absolutely nothing but a bunch of hogwash to
this thread.

> None of them answered the question he was asking, so they were also an
> entirely unnecessary waste of mental bandwidth for everybody following
> the exchange (including the OP).
>
> Hope this clears a few things up.
>
> Regards,
> Jo

Yep, you sure cleared things up. Showed everyone your hypocrisy.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

>
> Communication in a newsgroup isn't broadband enough to give you enough
> information to judge the other person, yet you insist that you can judge
> him anyway. Inisisting on gratitude that came over as rudeness adds on
> top of that.
> I don't know the technical term for this kind of attitude, but it's most
> certainly not "good manners".



I thank you very much.

>
> Then he finally admits:
>



Please, read the first line my first post.

Pavel, it seems you have a lot of time to waste here.

You totally ignored what I said: I'm a SQL/MySQL newbie, I'm a
client/interactive developer (not a database designer), I'm learning by
experience (--->by searching, --->by reading, --->by asking, --->by doing).

Being you a "team leader" (but who would believe that? It seems you are
simply making self-promotion), you should know the importance of
knowledge "exploration" (if your pedantic vision of the world lets you
read academic papers, you can find some information here:
http://web.media.mit.edu/~mres/clubh...design-v6.pdf).

Best regards.

Joachim Durchholz <jo@durchholz.org> wrote in
<f1vpro$u05$1@online.de>:
> Pavel Lepin schrieb:
>> Joachim Durchholz <jo@durchholz.org> wrote in
>> <f1v4l9$hs$1@online.de>:
>>> Communication in a newsgroup isn't broadband enough to
>>> give you enough information to judge the other person,
>>> yet you insist that you can judge him anyway.
>>
>> Pardon me, 'judge him'? Can you please explain what you
>> could possibly mean? My stating that his knowledge/skills
>> in the field seem nonexistant?
>
> Exactly.
> In a technical newsgroup, it's one of the stronger
> offenses.

Pardon me for being blunt, but that's bullshit. Since when
a 'you don't seem to know foo' statement became an ad
hominem attack? Not-knowing-something is an inescapable
consequence of human condition on this ball of mud.
Not-knowing-something is absolutely normal. There's nothing
shameful about not-knowing-something.

Can I perhaps suggest reading the following:

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

I may disagree with Mr. Raymond in general and with this
document in particular on great many things, but it goes to
show you that perhaps you shouldn't make blanket statements
on what is and what isn't acceptable in techie fora based
solely on your own bias and preferences. That's rude, for
one thing, and pretentious, for another.

>> Could you perhaps point out
>> to him that he shouldn't judge my manners on a basis of
>> just one post?
>
> There's a difference.

Oh, I see. I even know what the difference is--quod licet
Jovi non licet bovi, and you get to choose who's gonna be
Jupiter for some reason.

> Manners are immediately visible.

Because you say so? And tech skills are not--because you say
so? Have you perhaps tried reading the OP's questions? Let
me quote for you:

Message-ID:
<4642c037$0$17951$4fafbaef@reader1.news.tin.it>

<quote>

subtenante ha scritto:
> Ask MySQL exactly how you asked us :
> SELECT COUNT(product_name)
> FROM products
> where is_active=1
> GROUP BY cat_id ORDER BY cat_id

one moment:
is_active is in the categories table (not in products)!

</quote>

Sure, you may be capable of assuming OP's certain
proficiency with MySQL even after that. If you manage that,
I envy the sheer power of your imagination, and if you can
repeat 'he *still* might actually know something about
MySQL' three times in a row with a straight face, I'll
seriously consider eating my beard. Raw. Without salt.

>> Could you perhaps point out the same thing
>> to yourself?
>
> I'm judging your manners as shown.

I'm judging his understarding as shown.

> I'm not implying anything beyond newsgroup behavior (nor
> are they particularly relevant).

Actually, you are, later in this post. That doesn't really
concern me, but shouldn't this concern *you*? *You* are
arguing against assumptions, after all. I start wondering
whether the very process of logical reasoning is somehow
objectionable to you. In others, at least. Maybe in
disagreeing others.

>>> Inisisting on gratitude that came over as rudeness adds
>>> on top of that.
>>
>> I don't believe I insisted on OP having to express his
>> gratitude to me in my posts.
>
> You did:
>
> >>> How kind it is of you to point out my awfully bad
> >>> manners to me right after receiving some free advice

No, I didn't. I didn't insist on anything. My point was that
he might want to reconsider his behaviour unless he wants
some of the people helping him to *plonk* him once and for
all.

>> In my opinion, the OP clearly demonstrated in his posts
>> that he doesn't know a thing about MySQL.
>
> In my opinion, you're basing a very broad statement on a
> very narrow amount of information.

Of course I am. And of course you aren't. Because you say
so. Bushwah. Try reading the thread.

>> I gave him what I consider the best advice
>> under the circumstances--to read an introductory
>> book/tutorial on the matter. After that I remarked that
>> his team leader might not like the fact that he's
>> dabbling in something he's not qualified for; and that he
>> doesn't seem to *try* to become qualified.
>
> More assumptions.
> Even the assumption that he has a team leader is
> unwarranted.

And that assumption, I don't doubt, is *awfully* insulting.
How could I even think a man of his great stature would be
following anyone's orders?

> That advice could have been totally irrelevant. (It
> wasn't, but you didn't know when you posted.)

No it couldn't've been. He has a boss, even if he's his own
boss. And his boss--whoever he is, even if it's the OP
himself--might want to consider the institutional wisdom
that people working with something they don't understand
might help cut short-term costs, but only at the expense of
a drastic increase in long-term maintenance and support
costs.

>> Would that be a three-page "Joins
>> 101" lecture, despite the fact that such lectures can be
>> easily found in precisely the introductory reading I
>> recommended, and despite the fact that OP's understanding
>> seems limited enough that perhaps it would be better for
>> him to start with lectures on even more basic
>> concepts,--and, mind you, such lectures can be easily
>> found in precisely the introductory reading I
>> recommended.
>
> Post a URL, with a keyword or two on the content so the OP
> has a rough idea whether following is worth it.
> Post the answer to the question, or at least give those
> keywords that he needs for a Google search (but try the
> keywords yourself before doing that - sometimes there's
> too much noise in the signal and the search results are
> useless).

You should perhaps consider the fact that that's something
I, for one, would regard as an insult, because it doesn't
concern knowledge or skill, but implies a lack of basic
reasoning capability. Suggestion that the OP is unable to
figure out that the possible search terms while looking for
MySQL Tutorial would be 'MySQL Tutorial' is derisive beyond
belief.

But that's actually beside the point. The problem is not
that it might be understood as a calculated insult, but the
fact that I, for one, consider 'help' like that extremely
objectionable. I don't suppose I should throw that Chinese
proverb about fish and fishing at you? You've probably
heard it often enough. The best help is pointing the one
asking for help in the right direction. The right direction
not being 'something that will solve his arbitrary problem'
but 'something that will help him to solve his arbitrary
problem, so that he may become more proficient at solving
problems, and the world would become a slightly better
place overall'.

> In other words, if you think the OP didn't do his
> homework, then the same applies to you :-/

Aren't you making assumptions? I did the OP's homework,
including chanting 'Google Is My Friend' thrice before
clicking the search button. I didn't share the results with
the OP, because it is my belief that that would do him more
harm than good.

> If you really think the OP should be told about this kind
> of thing, mail him in private.

I can decide where to post my replies on my own, thank you
very much. And I hope you can decide which posts you don't
want to see on your own.

> If you have a feeling that it's not worth it, go ask
> yourself why posting to the newsgroup is so much more
> fun

You're making assumptions. It's not fun, and it doesn't do
my blood pressure any good. Posting to newsgroup is better
strictly because it allows for further discussion of
problems among all the members of a group. To give a
hypothetical scenario, imagine the OP reading a tutorial
after my post, attempting to solve his problem on his own,
but failing due to some sort of subtle catch he's failed to
grasp. In that case follow-up to my post would be the
logical place for further discussion.

> at least for myself, once I found out that the it
> was a kind of dark pleasure that came from the ability to
> publicly humiliate people

You know, I really don't care one bit for people who think
I'm humiliating them by solving their problems for them
without proper bowing and scraping before their towering
intellects that, seemingly, think it would be below their
abilities to do something as mundane as reading a tutorial.

I'm not, and I didn't have such an intention, too, but once
they start throwing 'rude's and 'humiliation's around, I
really don't give a flying anything about them anymore, and
become perfectly willing to *start* humiliating them
afterwards in vain hope they might consider switching to a
different career track, so that I never have to work on one
dev team with them.

> I immediately decided I didn't want to become *that* kind
> of person and stopped it (this exchange still has traces
> of it, which is why I'm not going to continue this for
> long). I kindly ask you to check your heart whether a
> similar mechanism might be at work in it. And to check
> whether you want to be that kind of person, too. Then,
> please, decide :-)

You're making assumptions. Can I most respectfully advise
you not to project your own problems on others? What I
actually enjoy the most is a lively discussion on some sort
of interesting problem. Helping neophytes I do not enjoy at
all, whatever my tone or approach, but I feel a moral
obligation to help them,--not so much in solving their
immediate problems, but in becoming better professionals by
acquiring a knack for solving problems on their own. I owe
that debt to the people who taught *me* to solve
problems,--occasionally going beyond rude in the process
AAMF. Which was friggin' good for me in the end, believe it
or not.

>> I seriously don't get it. What did I do wrong to deserve
>> a "thank you, you disgustingly rude person" response from
>> the OP?
>
> You sprayed about around four unjustified assumptions, of
> which one happened to be true but irrelevant.

There's something wrong with your math, I believe.

You know, I'm getting tired of it, so here's my ad hominem:
have you considered a career in politics? You're awfully
good at calling whatever you're standing on High Moral
Ground, and painting the rest of us mere mortals black.
That 'sprayed' also was quite nice. Politicians have to
know how to manipulate their audiences with precise,
morally loaded choices of words in their speeches.

I'm also tempted to mention Belbo's charming Piedmontese
turn of phrase wrt people and their corks from Foucault's
Pendulum. Well, I suppose I already did.

> None of them answered the question he was asking, so they
> were also an entirely unnecessary waste of mental
> bandwidth for everybody following the exchange (including
> the OP).

Have you ever heard of XY problem? If you fail to recognise
it, that's what really leads to a major lossage in mental
bandwidth in the end.

> Hope this clears a few things up.

It doesn't, apart from the fact that in your opinion I'm a
mean, uncultured bully and that I'm now of about as low
opinion where you are concerned. I suggest mutual
*plonk*ing as the only practical way to reconcile our
differences.

--
Pavel Lepin

Pavel Lepin schrieb:
> Joachim Durchholz <jo@durchholz.org> wrote in
> <f1vpro$u05$1@online.de>:
>> Pavel Lepin schrieb:
>>> Joachim Durchholz <jo@durchholz.org> wrote in
>>> <f1v4l9$hs$1@online.de>:
>>>> Communication in a newsgroup isn't broadband enough to
>>>> give you enough information to judge the other person,
>>>> yet you insist that you can judge him anyway.
>>> Pardon me, 'judge him'? Can you please explain what you
>>> could possibly mean? My stating that his knowledge/skills
>>> in the field seem nonexistant?
>> Exactly.
>> In a technical newsgroup, it's one of the stronger
>> offenses.
>
> Pardon me for being blunt, but that's bullshit.

Well, then discussing this isn't useful.

> In my opinion, the OP clearly
> demonstrated in his posts that he doesn't know a thing
> about MySQL.



Pavel: I said that in the first line of my first post but now I'm quite
sure you are blind because you look for a "demonstration" (!) while this
thing has been declared from the very beginning of the thread



> I gave him what I consider the best advice
> under the circumstances--to read an introductory
> book/tutorial on the matter.



The matter is the way you say things, not the substance of what you say
("Meanwhile hope your team leader doesn't find out
you're not up to snuff": its very frustrating to find something like
this on usenet)



> After that I remarked that his
> team leader might not like the fact that he's dabbling in
> something he's not qualified for; and that he doesn't seem
> to *try* to become qualified.



Pavel, you are boring, really. You consider your little world the only
possible world:
1. the team leader could like the fact that the client-side developer
can sometimes try to improve its skills on secondary/irrelevant projects;
2. the team leader could not exist at all;
3. you are not my team leader;
4. not every team leader thinks the world as you do;
5. you don't seem to be qualified to be a "teacher" on usenet: you
simply loose time, giving advices your way and self-promoting your skills;



> In response, the OP said I
> should learn good manners.



LOL, unbelievable, please, tell me you are a troll! :-D