Re:Missing Structure in Technical Discussions
by kvark on Tuesday June 30, 2020 @02:15PM
(#23693018)
Perhaps, not knowing the author of a point is a feature? I'm often engaged in discussions where the authorship hurts more than it helps. Ideas are being referred to as "John's idea", conflating objective ideas with subjective positions. I recall explicitly asking WebGPU group to not consider an idea to be "mine" but rather just discuss it objectively for what it is.
Re:Missing Structure in Technical Discussions
by jacobr1 on Wednesday July 01, 2020 @12:34PM
(#23703365)
Also, I regularly play the advocatus diaboli to ensure we are thinking through a particular position. Not necessarily because I believe it, but because if we can address the relevant concerns we'll have a more robust system. But having the position opposite of your own, be labeled yours, since you happened to bring it up, can be pretty annoying.
Re:Missing Structure in Technical Discussions
by samkater on Tuesday June 30, 2020 @02:22PM
(#23693084)
Yeah, I think there are two sides of it. One is as you say, people need to keep an open mind and accept good ideas on their merits.
I try to limit my online discourse because I know I'm prone to knee-jerk reactions. A _very_ long time ago I wondered to myself why this mbostock person knew so much about d3. A little while later it clicked, haha!
One thing that isn't immediately clear to me is how to associate specific individuals to a comment. Sometimes knowing who made an argument is very important. I like to believe that people are a little more careful about forming their reasoning when they are debating with the author or maintainer of a project, for example.