There's a thing people with opinions do sometimes, where they assume that anyone who doesn't like a thing just *doesn't understand* it, and their response is invariably to just explain the thing louder:
- Lisp and Forth's syntax
- blockchains, and applications thereof
- that one guy I used to work with who proudly stated that anyone who disagreed with his overly strict git commit message standards just needed to get good at git
- some nontrivial portion of controversial political issues
I don't know what to do with this revelation, except to maybe form the Curly Braces Party and run for office on a bizarre platform that only takes positions on things of no consequence.
@logan But did you know you can pass `-m` twice to add more text after the subject line, or not pass `-m` at all to open $EDITOR?
Obviously you didn't, and that is the reason you don't do the subject+separate description thing, you just didn't know you could. If you did, you'd clearly see how awesome it is.
(I wish I was mischaracterizing the argument, but I am not, this is actually a thing someone said)
@firstname.lastname@example.org i just don't care 😆
git serves only 2 purposes.
1. i can point to it and go 'look at my terrible code!'
2. if my local system goes down for whatever reason i can recover the code and i wont have to start from ground 0 again.
so really instead of me getting good they just need to get out of my way and just hold my files. #🤔
FWIW, I got a lot better at git once I developed a good mental model of how it works.
(I should probably write that blog post where I explain it sometime, but Git For Computer Scientists was pretty helpful:
@email@example.com @firstname.lastname@example.org @email@example.com I'm sure it is a great tool for computer scientists or even professional programmers but i am neither.
i just need a backup realistically but git has the added bonus of being able to share the code easily and i can tag specific lines of code.
@be as a member of the Tabs Party, I strongly disapprove of this and I'm going to make some extremely impolite and extremely ad hominem campaign ads against you
@emily I mean, one of those is not like the others. 🙂
All but one are points where one could reasonably have a different opinion, and there can be an interesting discussion around the topic as long as everybody are willing to listen.
Maybe counter with the assumption that the other person likes it because they *don't* understand it well *enough* and proceed to explain it back to them in excruciating detail while pointing out the flaws?
I mean, it'd be really tedious but kind of funny.
@emily I'd like to know what that fallacy is called. It's where you say "Only people who claim X is true are qualified to judge whether X is true or not." Like the Emperor's New Clothes but for nerds instead of hipsters.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!