|
|
Posted by Ed Mullen on 03/15/07 22:23
dorayme wrote:
> In article <etcd8l$11f$1@aioe.org>,
> Bernhard Sturm <sturmnixspam@datacomm.ch> wrote:
>
>> dorayme wrote:
>>> In article <etcc2j$tgn$1@aioe.org>,
>>> Bernhard Sturm <sturmnixspam@datacomm.ch> wrote:
>>>
>>> JK did not
>>> assume OP had no reason. Obviously he had the simple (if
>>> misguided) reason of wanting to change a font size in mid
>>> sentence. And JK was saying not to do that without further
>>> reason.
>>>
>> No problem :-) I understood JK very well, I was just surprised that he
>> gave him a solution for his obviously misguided question...
>>
>
> Well, fair enough... personally, I don't think it was all that
> obviously misguided. Not everyone explains why they want to do
> things and it cannot be doubted that there could be good reasons
> to do what they wanted.
But! But! JK /always/ doubts that there could be *any* reason outside
of his reasoning to warrant any thing not of his devising.
It is, honestly, a tad sad. He is knowledgeable, no doubt. But his
didacticism off-puts to such an extent that his (potentially) useful
advice is oft ignored as the rantings of a sycophant. Hence the real
potential for damage to content by form. Not too much of a problem for
me as I am fairly well able to "consider the source." Newbies who could
benefit most, however, are most likely to be offended by the anti-social
form and ignore the potentially beneficial advice. Or, as Dad used to
say: "If he's acting like an ass, he probably is one most of the time.
Your job is to figure out which is which, when is when, and decide to
listen, laugh, or ignore." And, no, Dad didn't allow for "just shoot
the bastard." Too messy and fraught with legal implications.
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|