[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Python-Dev] Drop/deprecate Tkinter?

On 3 May 2018 at 03:26, Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info> wrote:

>> Will all due respect, it's sometimes unpredictable what kind of wording
>> Anglo-Saxons will take as an insult, as there's lot of obsequiosity
>> there that doesn't exist in other cultures. To me, "not give a damn"
>> reads like a familiar version of "not care about something", but
>> apparently it can be offensive.
> I'm Anglo-Saxon[1], and honestly I believe that it is thin-skinned to
> the point of ludicrousness to say that "no-one gives a damn" is an
> insult. This isn't 1939 when Clark Gable's famous line "Frankly my dear,
> I don't give a damn" was considered shocking. Its 2018 and to not give a
> damn is a more forceful way of saying that people don't care, that they
> are indifferent.

Sigh. That's not what I was saying at all. I was trying to point out
that Antoine's claim that people should ignore the rhetoric and that
complaining about the attitude was unreasonable, was in itself unfair.
People have a right to point out that a mail like the OP's was badly

> With respect to Paul, I literally cannot imagine why he thinks that
> *anyone*, not even the tkinter maintainers or developers themselves,
> ought to feel *offended* by Ivan's words.

Personally, they didn't offend me. I don't pretend to know how others
might take them. But they *did* annoy me. I'm frankly sick of people
(not on this list) complaining that people who work on projects in
their own time, free of charge, "don't care enough" or "are ignoring
my requirement". We all do it, to an extent, and it's natural to get
frustrated, but the onus is on the person asking for help to be polite
and fair. And maybe this response was the one where I finally let that
frustration show through. I may read less email for a week or two,
just to get a break.

> But I think a clue might be his subsequent use of the word *annoyed*. Is
> it annoying to be told that "no-one cares" when in fact you care? Of
> course it can be. It is a perfectly reasonable to feel annoyed. But it
> isn't reasonable to lash out at every little annoyance.

Correct, I'm personally annoyed rather than offended. And maybe I
reacted strongly (although my reaction was mainly a defense of
people's right to be annoyed or offended, not a direct response to the
OP). I *hope* it wasn't "lashing out", but I concede that others may
view it differently than I do. It *certainly* isn't against "every
little annoyance" though - I've been dealing politely and calmly with
*many* entitled and misguided complaints recently (in many lists and
fora - no point in trying to go hunting down what I'm referring to
;-))  and this was one too many. I should probably have just shut up
and deleted the thread. I *will* stop at this point and not respond
again on this thread.

> All interpersonal interactions can involve annoyances. And none of us
> are purely on the receiving end, we all also cause them. None of us are
> so perfect that we can afford to lash out each time somebody causes some
> tiny little annoyance. We ought to gloss over the little ones, just as
> we hope others will swallow *their* annoyance at the things we do.
> If we're going to be open, respectful and considerate, we have a duty
> not to have a hair-trigger "I'm offended" response at tiny annoyances.

While true, this is biased in favour of people who start new threads,
allowing them the freedom to not consider other's feelings or
situations while expecting the recipients to be forgiving of hyperbole
and overstated rhetoric. Relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1984/

> "That's offensive!", in this day and age, is the nuclear weapon of
> interpersonal conflict, and nothing Ivan said was so terrible that it
> deserved such an attack. Not if we are to be open, considerate and
> respectful. We ought to start by respecting the clear emotional pain in
> his email and not responding by going on the attack. "A soft answer
> turns away wrath".

If that's directed at me, it's unfair. Personally, I consider "it's
offensive" to be a mild expression of distaste at what someone says -
often used somewhat jokingly, in reference to "political correctness"
style jokes. Antoine clearly took it otherwise - his mention of "Anglo
Saxon" suggests to me that he feels it's a cultural thing - although
if so, he's misinterpreted the relevant cultures as far as I can see.
British informal culture in my experience tends to be similar to what
I describe above as my view. Or maybe he's just thinking of "people
taking too much care to stick within the letter of codes of conduct",
I don't know. I'm happy to try to avoid the word "offensive" in my
future posts - it clearly has connotations that don't match what I

I've said my piece, so I'll leave it at that. I don't want mailing
lists to become sterile places where everyone feels unable to speak
their mind for fear of upsetting others, but I do think we *all* need
to consider the other person's perspective. And I *particularly* think
that people who start new threads need to be careful of the tone they
want to set for the thread. For me, having to deal with a huge range
of people with radically different backgrounds and experiences is one
of the biggest benefits of participating in open source, and of the
internet in general - I'd hate for that benefit to be stifled by
excessive need for "careful" speech. But conversely, we need to
respect and learn from those differences, not ignore them. Sermon
over, sorry.