I find that he comes across a lot better on video than on twitter, seems less dogmatic and his sense of humour is clearer. Most people aren't going to waste time on a stream, so his twitter personality is what they see.

Agreed. Twitter tends to bring out the troll in some people, and that might be the case here.

Or it brings out the negative interpretations in some people.

True, the restricted length makes it a terrible format for any sort of nuanced discussion on complex issues. Way too easy for folks to talk past each other.

Very true. It is extremely common for people to impose negativity into other people's textual comments. Very frequently some comment will be written that is flat, matter of fact, brief and trying to be helpful, and the writer will later be shocked by readers assuming sarcasm and insult. In general, the Internet does contain a lot of sarcasm and insult. But, I expect a huge amount of that is wrongly attributed. And, that extra dose feeds back into the assumption that negatively is standard practice on the net --leading to more legit negatively...

Twitter rewards trollish behaviour, as it gets shared most.

> Even if he has [harassed someone], that doesn't invalidate anything he's saying

I just don't think there is ever a good reason.

He does have a tendency to say things about a person suggesting they are ignorant or stupid when they ask a question he doesn't like. There often seems to be a fine line between him getting annoyed and him belittling the contribution someone else makes to a discussion. He is extremely sensitive.

I just think if someone is going to seriously discuss how to be more emotionally stable, they should probably demonstrate more stable behavior themselves.

I continue to be amazed at the dilution of terms like "harassment".

> say things about a person suggesting they are ignorant or stupid

If that is what he thinks, that is a perfectly reasonable thing to say, particularly as no-one is forced to ask him questions. It is not "harassment" by any stretch of the imagination.

> He is extremely sensitive.

Maybe the one being extremely sensitive isn't him.

> If that is what he thinks, that is a perfectly reasonable thing to say [calling them ignorant or stupid], particularly as no-one is forced to ask him questions.

You are right, we have a different idea of what is polite behavior, and what is insulting behavior.

I don't think the difference is between polite or insulting - the difference is between harassment and non-harassment.

Someone being rude or short may bring down the tone of discussion and may not be condusive to proper discourse, but harassment is another beast entirely. People's lives are ruined by harassment and harassers may have their reputations ruined.

Suggesting that Jonathon Blow harasses people on twitter when in fact you mean that he is rude and insensitive is borderline libel.

I didn't introduce the word "harassment" into this discussion, incidentally. I did use the phrase "bit of a bully," so perhaps that was the domino.

This is true. I had to look over the last few comments and the payload is here:

>> Even if he has [harassed someone], that doesn't invalidate anything he's saying

>I just don't think there is ever a good reason.

If you'd have said 'I just don't think there is ever a good reason to be rude or demeaning' then people wouldn't have made the link to harassment. Or even address the word harassment explicitly.

Either way, the points were getting conflated.

Probably, yes.

However, the bigger difference is that for me, someone not being polite is not the same as that someone being insulting, and certainly not guilty of harassment, and in fact even someone being insulting is not the same as harassment.

There are quite a number of steps in-between, with "insulting" being one of these steps, but certainly not the only one.

>> perfectly reasonable thing to say [calling them ignorant or stupid]

Of course your rephrasing is also quite the distortion. Here's the original:

>> say things about a person suggesting they are ignorant or stupid

[my emphasis]

Saying something about a person "suggesting" they are ignorant or stupid is, in terms of polite interaction, radically different from "calling them ignorant or stupid". In fact, merely suggesting such things instead of saying them directly in the face of actual ignorance or stupidity is what one would consider polite but truthful. Going beyond that and avoiding anything that could suggest such an interpretation would be untruthful and a disservice to those asking questions. And IMHO much ruder than the unvarnished truth.

Also, the former ("suggesting") could be almost anything, for example a simple RTFM could be construed as suggesting someone is ignorant or stupid, no matter how politely you express it, but is also a perfectly fine thing to say. Directly calling someone stupid because they didn't RTFM would be quite different, and definitely more in the direction of rude and possible insulting (but still nowhere near harassment or bullying).

@hellofunk

Not him, but I think that is in fact, insulting behavior. Everyone has a right to be insulting. It's just not harassment.

I never used the word harassment, myself. I did say "a bit of a bully," and I think that phrase is fine when referring to others who openly insult people. But apparently, my opinion is in the minority here, and that's fine. Surprised to see my comment turn into this thread.

He gave the stream not because he considers himself some kind of expert on the topic, but because people were asking him how he personally deals with depression and malaise.