Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism

[Xah Lee]

Criticism versus Constructive Criticism

Xah Lee, 2003-01

A lot intelligent people are rather confused about criticism,
especially in our “free-speech” free-for-all internet age. When
they say “constructive criticisms are welcome” they mostly mean
“bitching and complaints not welcome”. Rarely do people actually
mean that “criticism without suggestion of possible solutions are not
welcome” or “impolite criticism not welcome”.

Such discernment is important. Wanton bitching as internet-using geeks
are used to is not criticism is any form.

People can be respected and make a living out of criticisms, called
critics, but not bitching. And when one really value opinions, you
often want criticism without qualifications. Just be happy that
valuable criticisms may come to you free from the experts in the
public. The instant you qualify what kind of feedback are welcome, your
feedback is compromised. (this is particularly so for political or
controversial subjects)

One easy way for many of the unix geeks to understand this is the
cryptology industry.

If one really desires valuable criticisms that is polite or with
solutions or “constructive ” (whatever that means), one usually have
to pay.
----
This post is archived at:

http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/criticism.html

Xah
xah@xahlee.org
∑ http://xahlee.org/

[Ari Johnson]

Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism

"Xah Lee" <xah@xahlee.org > writes:

A large amount of free, constructive criticism follows.

1. Learn where to post things.
[color=blue]
> Criticism versus Constructive Criticism[/color]

2. Learn when to capitalize words in a title.
[color=blue]
> Xah Lee, 2003-01[/color]

3. Learn when to post things.
[color=blue]
> A lot intelligent people are rather confused about criticism,
> especially in our “free-speech” free-for-all internet age. When
> they say “constructive criticisms are welcome” they mostly mean
> “bitching and complaints not welcome”. Rarely do people actually
> mean that “criticism without suggestion of possible solutions are not
> welcome” or “impolite criticism not welcome”.[/color]

4. Try "many."

5. Learn how to use commas.

6. Nobody says "constructi ve criticisms are welcome." They use the
singular, as should you.

7. Learn how to use commas.

8. Learn how to use parallel structure.
[color=blue]
> Such discernment is important. Wanton bitching as internet-using geeks
> are used to is not criticism is any form.[/color]

9. Generally, the use of sentence forms like "such <noun> is
<adjective>" is even frowned upon in legal writing anymore; but it
is almost never appropriate to use the word "bitching" in the next
sentence.
[color=blue]
> People can be respected and make a living out of criticisms, called
> critics, but not bitching. And when one really value opinions, you
> often want criticism without qualifications. Just be happy that
> valuable criticisms may come to you free from the experts in the
> public. The instant you qualify what kind of feedback are welcome, your
> feedback is compromised. (this is particularly so for political or
> controversial subjects)[/color]

10. You're still insisting that criticism in the general sense is a
plural thing. It is not. Also, these "criticisms " are not what we
call "critics." We call the people making them critics. I'd let this
one slide but you bounce back and forth too many times in one sentence
to get away with it.

11. Learn how to match a verb to its noun.

12. You still haven't figured out when to use "criticisms ." I'll give
you another hint: nowhere within your writing.

13. Learn when your "expert" criticism is apropos and when it is not.

14. If you can't figure out when not to pluralize the word criticism,
I don't know why I expect you to know when to use "is" instead of
"are." However, I still recommend you learn this not-so-subtle
point of English grammar.

15. Sentences in parentheses are still sentences - capitalize and
punctuate appropriately.

16. When you make a sweeping, general statement, it helps to support
it with some kind of logically-related evidence.
[color=blue]
> One easy way for many of the unix geeks to understand this is the
> cryptology industry.[/color]

17. Learn when to capitalize proper nouns.

18. The cryptology industry is not a "way." It is an industry. Learn
how to write clear sentences that use words in meaningful ways. One
way to do this is to utilize verbs.
[color=blue]
> If one really desires valuable criticisms that is polite or with
> solutions or “constructive ” (whatever that means), one usually have
> to pay.[/color]

19. The rule is that third-person singular subjects take "is" and
third-person plural subjects take "are." You seem to have this
backwards.

20. If you are offering a dissertation on constructive criticism, you
ought to define the term rather than using a parenthetical
shoulder-shrug like this.

21. Third-person singular subjects take "has," not "have."

22. When you write something, even when it is not welcome or not
relevant to the place you post it, it is helpful to actually make
a point rather than just making several statements of things which
alternate between obvious and nonsensical.
[color=blue]
> This post is archived at:
> http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/criticism.html[/color]

23. If something from three years ago is on the web, it is indexed by
Google. If someone wants to read it, they will find it via
Google. There is no need to post it on inappropriate newsgroups.
[color=blue]
>
> Xah
> xah@xahlee.org
> ∑ http://xahlee.org/[/color]

(This isn't constructive criticism, but just a question:) Are you the
sum of your web page?

[John Bokma]

Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism

Ari Johnson <iamtheari@gmai l.com> wrote:

24. Learn when not to reply to a troll (and bother several groups while
doing so).

--
John Bokma Freelance software developer
&
Experienced Perl programmer: http://castleamber.com/

[Terry Reedy]

Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism


<mfmorss@aep.co m> wrote in message
news:OFE5595721 .F40FEAE1-ON8525715B.0071 EEF6-8525715B.00720E 24@aep.com...[color=blue]
> Would these contestants please GET OFF THE LIST with their
> non-Python-related contentiousness ?[/color]
[snip long repost of the very stuff complained about]

[Guest]

Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism

> "Xah Lee" <xah@xahlee.org > writes:[color=blue]
>
> A large amount of free, constructive criticism follows.[/color]

Just the usual repetitive content free stream-of-consciousness
material that Xah Lee is notorious for.

[Roedy Green]

Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism

On 25 Apr 2006 12:21:43 -0700, "Xah Lee" <xah@xahlee.org > wrote,
quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
[color=blue]
>Criticism versus Constructive Criticism[/color]

I think you would do better to put this sort of thing on a website
rather than post it in a newsgroup. It is too pretentious for a
newsgroup. Newsgroups are about question and answer.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.

[Eli Gottlieb]

Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism

Xah Lee wrote:[color=blue]
> Criticism versus Constructive Criticism
>
> Xah Lee, 2003-01
>
> A lot intelligent people are rather confused about criticism,
> especially in our “free-speech” free-for-all internet age. When
> they say “constructive criticisms are welcome” they mostly mean
> “bitching and complaints not welcome”. Rarely do people actually
> mean that “criticism without suggestion of possible solutions are not
> welcome” or “impolite criticism not welcome”.
>
> Such discernment is important. Wanton bitching as internet-using geeks
> are used to is not criticism is any form.
>
> People can be respected and make a living out of criticisms, called
> critics, but not bitching. And when one really value opinions, you
> often want criticism without qualifications. Just be happy that
> valuable criticisms may come to you free from the experts in the
> public. The instant you qualify what kind of feedback are welcome, your
> feedback is compromised. (this is particularly so for political or
> controversial subjects)
>
> One easy way for many of the unix geeks to understand this is the
> cryptology industry.
>
> If one really desires valuable criticisms that is polite or with
> solutions or “constructive ” (whatever that means), one usually have
> to pay.
> ----
> This post is archived at:
> http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/criticism.html
>
> Xah
> xah@xahlee.org
> ∑ http://xahlee.org/
>[/color]
Oh, God, not another one.

--
The science of economics is the cleverest proof of free will yet
constructed.

[John Bokma]

[Reported] (was Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism)

Eli Gottlieb <eligottlieb@gm ail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Oh, God, not another one.[/color]

Instead of cross posting more garbage, do as follows:

Email a complaint to the email addresses you can look up yourself and
include the entire message of Xah:

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?track=72.231.179.135 posting host
http://www.spamcop.net/sc?track=xahlee.org spamvertized site


If enough people complain with both, it might stop one day.

--
John Bokma Freelance software developer
&
Experienced Perl programmer: http://castleamber.com/

[Xah Lee]

Re: (was Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism)

Dear John Bokma,

This is a public notice that what you are trying to do is getting close
to harrassment from the law's perspective.

Thanks.

Xah
xah@xahlee.org
∑ http://xahlee.org/


John Bokma wrote:[color=blue]
> Eli Gottlieb <eligottlieb@gm ail.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
> > Oh, God, not another one.[/color]
>
> Instead of cross posting more garbage, do as follows:
>
> Email a complaint to the email addresses you can look up yourself and
> include the entire message of Xah:
>
> http://www.spamcop.net/sc?track=72.231.179.135 posting host
> http://www.spamcop.net/sc?track=xahlee.org spamvertized site
>
>
> If enough people complain with both, it might stop one day.[/color]

[Mark Thomas]

Re: (was Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism)

Xah Lee wrote:[color=blue]
> Dear John Bokma,
>
> This is a public notice that what you are trying to do is getting close
> to harrassment from the law's perspective.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Xah
> xah@xahlee.org
> ∑ http://xahlee.org/
>
>
> John Bokma wrote:[color=green]
>> Eli Gottlieb <eligottlieb@gm ail.com> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> Oh, God, not another one.[/color]
>> Instead of cross posting more garbage, do as follows:
>>
>> Email a complaint to the email addresses you can look up yourself and
>> include the entire message of Xah:
>>
>> http://www.spamcop.net/sc?track=72.231.179.135 posting host
>> http://www.spamcop.net/sc?track=xahlee.org spamvertized site
>>
>>
>> If enough people complain with both, it might stop one day.[/color]
>[/color]
Ooooh! (Waggles fingers beneath chin)

Mark

[Ken Tilton]

Re: [Reported] (was Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs ConstructiveCri ticism)



John Bokma wrote:[color=blue]
> Eli Gottlieb <eligottlieb@gm ail.com> wrote:
>
>[color=green]
>>Oh, God, not another one.[/color]
>
>
> Instead of cross posting more garbage, do as follows:
>
> Email a complaint to the email addresses you can look up yourself and
> include the entire message of Xah:
>
> http://www.spamcop.net/sc?track=72.231.179.135 posting host
> http://www.spamcop.net/sc?track=xahlee.org spamvertized site
>
>
> If enough people complain with both, it might stop one day.
>[/color]

What might stop? I see one technical post every one or few weeks from
Xah, followed by a dozen posts from self-appointed library-sushers such
as Eli and library-shusher-shushers such as you and me, none of which
are technical.

The one technical post, whatever one thinks of it, creates no problem;
what part of "if you find the content worthless, just ignore it" is not
understood? Nothing, actually. The respondents just like shushing people.

Back on topic for just a moment, Tilton's Law of Programming applies:
"Solve the real problem." So kudos for your shusher-shushing but...

....reporting Xah to spamcop would be an abuse of spamcop. Reporting Eli,
yourself, and me, however, would be perfectly reasonable. :)

love, peace, and quiet,

kenny

--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/

"Have you ever been in a relationship?"
Attorney for Mary Winkler, confessed killer of her
minister husband, when asked if the couple had
marital problems.

[Greg Menke]

Re: (was Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism)


Mark Thomas <anon> writes:
[color=blue]
> Xah Lee wrote:[color=green]
> > Dear John Bokma,
> > This is a public notice that what you are trying to do is getting close
> > to harrassment from the law's perspective.
> > Thanks.
> > Xah
> > xah@xahlee.org
> > ∑ http://xahlee.org/
> > John Bokma wrote:[color=darkred]
> >> Eli Gottlieb <eligottlieb@gm ail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Oh, God, not another one.
> >> Instead of cross posting more garbage, do as follows:
> >>
> >> Email a complaint to the email addresses you can look up yourself and
> >> include the entire message of Xah:
> >>
> >> http://www.spamcop.net/sc?track=72.231.179.135 posting host
> >> http://www.spamcop.net/sc?track=xahlee.org spamvertized site
> >>
> >>
> >> If enough people complain with both, it might stop one day.[/color]
> >[/color]
> Ooooh! (Waggles fingers beneath chin)
>
> Mark[/color]


So now Xah is an expert on law in addition to emacs. What a guy.

Gregm

[Roedy Green]

Re: (was Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism)

On 26 Apr 2006 12:29:33 -0700, "Xah Lee" <xah@xahlee.org > wrote,
quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
[color=blue]
>This is a public notice that what you are trying to do is getting close
>to harrassment from the law's perspective.[/color]

and what you do Xah, is very close to spam, another form of
harassment.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.

[John Bokma]

Re: [Reported] (was Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism)

Ken Tilton <kentilton@gmai l.com> wrote:

[ reported ][color=blue]
> What might stop?[/color]

The excessive cross posting.
[color=blue]
> I see one technical post every one or few weeks from
> Xah, followed by a dozen posts from self-appointed library-sushers
> such as Eli and library-shusher-shushers such as you and me, none of
> which are technical.
>
> The one technical post, whatever one thinks of it, creates no problem;[/color]

It does, it's cross posted in too many groups that have no direct relation
with each other, other then they are programming languages. Xah is
trolling, you know it, I know it.
[color=blue]
> what part of "if you find the content worthless, just ignore it" is
> not understood? Nothing, actually.[/color]

If I see someone throwing garbage on the street, should I ignore it? It
will blow away, or the street cleaners will pick it up.

I do not ignore it.

[color=blue]
> ...reporting Xah to spamcop would be an abuse of spamcop.[/color]

You're mistaken. I don't report Xah to spamcop. Spamcop has nothing to do
with Xah. I *do* report Xah to his ISP / USP and hosting provider though.

--
John Bokma Freelance software developer
&
Experienced Perl programmer: http://castleamber.com/

[John Bokma]

Re: (was Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Criticism vs Constructive Criticism)

"Xah Lee" <xah@xahlee.org > wrote:
[color=blue]
> Dear John Bokma,
>
> This is a public notice that what you are trying to do is getting
> close to harrassment from the law's perspective.[/color]

Which law?

You have been harrassing severl groups for too long with your drivel and
extremely badly written rants. I guess what you do comes way closer to
harrassment then me trying to kick your ass.

Lets hope some others join in and see who is going to win. Most trolls
give up after they lose a handful of accounts, since it gets more and more
expensive.

Find a new hobby if CS is too hard.

--
John Bokma Freelance software developer
&
Experienced Perl programmer: http://castleamber.com/