Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!linus!philabs!micomvax!ray
From: ray@micomvax.UUCP (Ray Dunn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: gotos
Message-ID: <993@micomvax.UUCP>
Date: 21 Apr 88 18:41:46 GMT
References: <1988Apr11.201934.20594@utzoo.uucp> <451@goofy.megatest.UUCP>
Reply-To: ray@micomvax.UUCP (Ray Dunn)
Organization: Philips Electronics Ltd. (TDS - Montreal) St. Laurent QC, Canada
Lines: 96

In article <451@goofy.megatest.UUCP> djones@megatest.UUCP (Dave Jones) writes:
>....
>Mr Spencer, Mr. David Brown, and the loquacious Mr. Gwyn all say straight 
>out that I am an advocate of the use of the goto statement.
>But I never once in any of my postings endorsed the use of the goto 
>statement!  You may verify as much if you will reread the postings.

Unfortunately, it is all too common on the net, even (especially?) by the
supposed "gurus", that a reasoned *non-polarized* argument is immediately
taken as a critisism.

If you are not with them, you are judged to be against them!  It happens to
all of us.

>     ... I only stated that the importance which some people place
>on avoiding the gotos is exceedingly exaggerated, and that time spent
>campaigning against its use is misspent. This is an opinion which I 
>still hold. 

As do many of us!

>
>But all this is quite incidental.  Mr. Spencer is entitled to his
>opinions about programming techniques, as am I. 
>I objected not to Mr. Spencer's mistaken reading of my postings.  
>I objected to his affrontary.
>

Ok.  You object.  All this does now though, is open up another discussion as
to what is "acceptable" behaviour on the net.  You have expressed your
opinion, they have too, by example.  Both opinions should be respected, if
not necessarily agreed with.

>You three, Spencer, Brown, and Gwyn, hold that it is proper for you to 
>publicly criticize the software produced by the company which employs me,
>on the basis of a few lines that I wrote here.  To presume that 
>you are competent to judge products you have never used is
>ridiculous.  To presume to make such pronouncements publicly is,
>by my values, rude at best. Perhaps I should only say that we have
>differing values not only about some  small software engineering matters,
>but also about what constitutes  good manners and acceptable behavior.
>
>I find this whole matter very distasteful.  I regret having provoked it.
>

I'm not fully supportive of your *attitude* here, as the net is essentially
a "soap-box" forum.  A poster *must* realize that (s)he is exposing himself
to all extremes of opinion, attitude, and behaviour, *and be prepared to
take the heat*.

A net poster is like an actor on a stage, (s)he must be prepared to accept
criticism of all sorts.  Support is, by its very nature, most often silent,
except in private e-mail responses.

Why can't you allow your opinions to stand on their own merits with the net
readership as a whole? 

Just because Spencer, Gwyn, et al, disagree with your views does not
denigrate your opinions in the eyes of the open-minded.

Indeed, as I believe in this case, the *opposite* is often correct.  They
don't "hold that it is proper to", they just spout off, in what is, by now,
an expected and predictable way.  *They* are exposing themselves in the same
way you are.

I'm afraid I can't accept whining about "bad manners" in this sort of forum.
To begin with, the right to be "bad mannered" is an intrinsic freedom just
as important as the right to hold stupid opinions.

Are you "hurt" by an opposing opinion?  Should you be "hurt" by a badly
mannered opposing opinion?  I think not.

Remember also, that the definitions of bad manners and stupid opinions are
extremely subjective.

Finally, what you are seeing on the net, is the *mental* responses which do
not get moderated by speech or personal contact - we are all in our own
little worlds here responding to faceless words!  There is no definition of
"bad manners" which has had time to mature in this environment.

Many of us, including myself, expose ourself in both ways.  So, people
disagree some of the time, people are offended some of the time.
Unfortunate, perhaps, but (profound statement follows (:-)) that's life!

There's *always* going to be somebody that disagrees, and there's *always*
going to be somebody whose reaction differs from your norms.

>I'm through with comp.lang.c for a while.

A pity, I respect your views, but it is probably for the best until you
realize that a net posting is very different from expressing an opinion in
private to a friend.  Confidence in yourself and a thick skin are very
useful attributes.


Ray Dunn.  ..{philabs, mnetor}!micomvax!ray