This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Squid use and configuration on cygwin

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 16:45:01 +0000,
"Dave Korn" <dave[dot]korn[at]artimi[dot]com> wrote:

>On 29 December 2007 15:22, Jeff wrote:
>> Hmmmmm... IMO, the anger is wholly justified, considering the
>> provocation: a dismissive response in the first instance, and a
>> sarcastic one in the second. 
>  Two wrongs don't make a right, and adding to a problem doesn't make it any

No, but it /is/ very *human*, isn't it?: misunderstandings happen,
someone gets annoyed, fingers of blame get pointed, people get
defensive, the original issue gets buried, and feelings escalate. My
mentor often used to quip that language is the poorest means of
communication ever invented by humans; email, which strips out all
modes of non-verbal communication (you don't even have the subtle cues
present in a hand-written letter), is that much worse.

Two wrongs definitely don't make a right but, once all the participants
accept that they "own" some part of the misunderstanding, it is
possible to move past "blamestorming"-- the discussion concerning who
'should' or 'should not' do or have done what-- and on to problem solving.

>>  And throwing epithets there, Dave, most
>> certainly adds much more heat than light to the conversation.
>  Maybe we have a language barrier here; where I come from, telling someone
>they're "being an ass" is a really pretty minor admonishment.

Yes, it's mild compared to other nouns and adjetives one could use to
describe someone and their ancestry, but... Where I come from--
assertiveness training classes (among other experiences and other types
of training)-- I have seen just how naturally and quickly "'you'
statements" (YOU are doing this, that, the other) put people on the
defensive. Name calling ("don't be a...") and comments like "Oh, grow
up!", generated as they usually are out of frustration and irritation,
are even more likely to put someone on the defensive and increase the
emotional content of a conversation.

The "wetware" of the human brain is far more complex than the latest
and greatest CPU, and "HumanOS" is a tricky thing, based as it is upon
individual experience in the context of a society. However, there is
some pretty good documentation out there... :D

>  Please note also that I didn't fail to offer up all the useful
>information I had on the subject and am continuing to try and actually
>understand and solve the problem.

Oh, I did, although perhaps a bit obscurely, by adding that "among
other things" comment to that last attribution line. It is an
unfortunate fact of human nature that someone who has not had training
in dealing with these sorts of misunderstandings will focus on the
emotional component ("Don't be an ass!") and consequently be blinded to
the rest. It is a hard truth that I've had to learn in my own life
that, when confronted with my anger, other people can hear /only/ the
anger, and not what I am saying.

Please do not think I am singling you out, Dave. IMO it is because
these concepts are missing that the conversation is proceeding as it
is. Though my comments are severely off topic to the list, I'm hoping
that they may help, and influence the participants to step back for a
moment of reflection.

"Sorry, my life is still in beta, and nowhere near stable enough for a

Unsubscribe info:
Problem reports:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]