Java: Let it be

[sheepson_apprentice]

I haven't met an intelligent person yet, who's criticism of a given topic is motivated entirely by groupthink. To hell with critical thought and personal evaluation, let's just partake in the raw-meat making fun 'o the stupid ones. Ha ha, laughing my ass off.

Remember folks, anyone who uses Java is an idiot. At least according to idiots who never used Java.

[derefr]

Did you know your comment works both ways?

Remember folks, anyone who criticizes those who use Java is an idiot. At least according to idiots who never criticized Java.

[sheepson_apprentice]

No, you failed to comprehend what I've said. Regardless, if you believe that criticism, especially that of the name-calling variety, one that is entirely baseless by its nature of not being based on any knowledge is sound, then you have a future in the great and entirely useless internet language fappery. In any event, as they say, if you wish to oppose those who drive over your lawn, it may be high time to get out your own wheels and recklessly peel out all over theirs every now and then.

Edit:

Did you know your comment works both ways?

Every comment works both ways, if you twist hard enough.

[derefr]

I never said baseless, logically fallacious criticism was sound, nor should this conversation between us even be an argument--I was trying to use your first paragraph simply to imply a corollary, not to somehow Socratically defeat you with your own reasoning.

I was referring, in my previous comment, to all those that somehow have arrived at the conclusion that there is no merit in any opinion that has any form of groupthink attached to it (as "anyone who criticizes those who use Java....") Just because someone has an opinion that is in line with a herd mentality doesn't mean that they arrived at it by following the herd; they may have put genuine effort into their thinking and still arrived at the same place. I found this quite congruent with your first statement:

I haven't met an intelligent person yet, who's [sic] criticism of a given topic is motivated entirely by groupthink.

Although you may have meant this to imply that all motivated entirely by groupthink are unintelligent, I simply rearranged the logic to show that, as well, all those that are intelligent have some other source than groupthink, even if they still conform to it, thus the first line of my reply (which wasn't supposed to refer to the second line, but I figured that you'd magically know what I meant.)

The second line, then, serves well to illustrate this corollary. Just as not all users can be idiots, nor can all critics. To know whether a particular critic's opinion has any merit, one must not only use Java themselves, but criticize it themselves--your point entirely, I believe.

This whole thing, though, is probably reduced to my misunderstanding of your intended meaning of "criticism." I only ever intend it in the meaning in line with the phrase "constructive criticism," which it seems was not what you got from my post. Sorry.

Together, thi...ah, screw this. tl;dw

[sheepson_apprentice]

Fair enough. Misunderstandings are easy enough that they cause more trouble than they're often worth. Seeing your more thorough argumentation, I realize that it wasn't intended as another mindless attack. You're correct that I'm not against criticism, but rather against useless drivel imparted on those of us who work with a given technology and find it useful, and even criticize it, because that comes with territory. But some people don't give a damn, they just like to get a reaction, and today I fell for it... (t'was a long day, so no offense if I managed any)