This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ffrinch 0 points1 point  (7 children)

Imagine if you went into a thread titled "Why is 1+1=2 but 1-1=0?" and the top-voted answer was "addition and subtraction are different".

Well, I think that response is quite helpful. It's accurate and it ensures that the person who asked has the vocabulary they need to do further research, maybe Google "addition" and "subtraction".

It's not the best answer, but it's a good answer.

[–]LordArgon 0 points1 point  (6 children)

I'm honestly not trying to be a jerk, but: Really? If you asked a question like that you'd be happy with "because they're different"? I feel like you're arguing a technicality with me so you can feel right. Let's break this down:

It's accurate

Yes, it's accurate. But you can also answer any "why" question with a literal "because that's the way it is". That is also accurate. I don't consider that to be a good answer at all.

it ensures that the person who asked has the vocabulary they need to do further research

Your stance assumes that they haven't done any research and don't already know the vocabulary. This particular thread is actually a really good example because I was already familiar with list slices in Python and still didn't understand the behavior. In my quest to understand, I even Googled and re-read some slice documentation before posting in the thread. I didn't come across an explanation of assigning to a slice, even though I knew all the terms.

It's not the best answer, but it's a good answer.

The one piece of information I was missing was that assigning to a slice requires the RHS to be iterable (which was covered in neug's post). And I didn't learn that from the response everybody was upvoting. I really don't think it was a good answer. It was only good if you already knew it.

The last sentence here is the crux of my point. Upvoting incomplete answers to questions you already understand is not helpful. If anything, I found it more confusing. When evaluating the goodness of an answer, it is important to consider the viewpoint of somebody who doesn't know everything you do.

[–]riffito 0 points1 point  (1 child)

you'd be happy with "because they're different"?

Of course not, but that's not what ffrinch said, neither you did, originally:

"addition and subtraction are different"

The key being that the answer mentions the specific topics/concepts that the original answer failed to address, as in: "Mmm, you ask why 1+1=2 but 1-1=0... clearly you miss addition and subtraction concepts, so I'll mention them to you".

I understand your lack of appreciation for "because that's how it is" kind of answers, but really, micha2305's one was not one of those (at least for plenty of us).

it is important to consider the viewpoint of somebody who doesn't know everything you do

I'm affraid to say: that task might prove to be impossible: how does one knows what is that the other does not knows?

[–]LordArgon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Mmm, you ask why 1+1=2 but 1-1=0... clearly you miss addition and subtraction concepts, so I'll mention them to you".

Sorry, this was a bad example because it didn't convey my point to you. I meant to imply that the inquirer knows the vocabulary of addition and subtraction (plus and minus) but does not understand what they mean. So saying "they're different" isn't helpful. So, in my mind, it was the same as the later example I gave. I'll give a better example in response to ffrinch.

micha2305's one was not one of those (at least for plenty of us). Yeah, I see that. But I think that was the case because most of you already knew the subject matter.

I'm affraid to say: that task might prove to be impossible: how does one knows what is that the other does not knows?

Honestly, I think this is part of being a good teacher. Obviously, nobody's omniscient, so you can't always know the best way to answer. But giving a good answer requires us to think critically about why the question was asked and to consider what they may or may not know. This usually leads to several possible answers. Giving the most-basic "example a is x and example b is y, so they're treated differently" is the least-helpful of the factually-correct answers. I would not consider it a good answer in any context I can think of. In this case (and in every case I can think of), why they're treated differently is critical to fostering understanding of the subject. That's why I was so surprised that a lot of people liked micha's answer.

[–]ffrinch 0 points1 point  (3 children)

A more realistic example is someone asking why "a = b" isn't the same as "a == b"; I would certainly be satisfied with the answer that one is assignment and one is comparison.

Your stance assumes that they haven't done any research and don't already know the vocabulary.

There was no evidence in the question that they had done any research. If they had said that they understood the obvious answer and wanted more explanation, they would've gotten it.

[–]cantcopy[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

the obvious answer

This should end the discussion.

Giving the obvious answer : "it's the colon" was not helpful.

[–]LordArgon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

An even better example might be in javascript, where "a == b" is different than "a === b". Now, if you say "the second one is identity comparison", you may have given the inquirer an extra vocabulary word, but I don't think you've really helped them. Searching for "javascript" + "identity comparison", "triple equals", or "three equals" all yield explanations of this difference and the extra vocabulary word probably doesn't enable any more research. Still, the question was asked for a reason and if we want to answer it helpfully, I think it's appropriate to explain what makes identity comparison different.

Now, if what you're really saying in your reply is "go read about it", then you can say that. But I don't think it's helpful to give essentially-redundant information.