I've already agreed that it wasn't a solution, and I completely agree with tye, and you, that there are flaws that make it wrong for this site. See my conversion with tye. I hope it's clear that I am not defending that solution - it doesn't work, I get that, I agree with it, I support tye's position and everyone else's who says, "that doesn't work". Are we on the same page on that now?

My followup post had nothing to do with the technical details of that proposal. It had to do with an abstract question I was asked about why I would propose a technical solution to a problem that seemed to be a social one.

I did my best to answer why with illustrative parallels. BrowserUK despite this not being about him at all, decided to weigh in and nit-pick instead of engage with the actual question: can one address the problems of a minority while not disrupting the majority?,In addition, he tried to make it about me. I pointed both these items out. As I mentioned in my reply to him about it being personal, when there are four variations of "you" in a sentence, it's pretty clear that sentence is meant to be about the person addressed. The sentence about "you and your ilk" is quite simply "shut up and go away", phrased in a way meant to hurt.

I did specifically say that very often, despite the fact the there are non-technical things we'll apparently never agree on, that there are posts, indeed nearly all of his posts about technical issues, that I agree with. (Comments are another thing we'll never agree about.) I read his technical posts. I upvote them. I believe I have, once or twice, even remarked that his solution was elegant or well-done. I absolutely respect BrowserUK's technical abilities.

We disagree on whether saying "I don't have that problem" is appropriate as a solution to someone else's problem. I thought that perhaps if I laid it out explicitly we might be able to talk about it. Apparently that's not possible.

Perhaps he might try not reading my posts as well. I'm sure it would make him happier.

In reply to Re^2: Let's get back on point, please by pemungkah
in thread Having our anonymous cake and eating it too by pemungkah

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.