|
Member 9082365 wrote: no professionals would even so much as suggest such barbarian responses these days.
That might explain their "success" 
They're focussing on unwanted behaviour. I'd say that the behaviour is not random.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Member 9082365 wrote: no professionals would even so much as suggest such barbarian responses these days
Could you define what you mean by 'professional' because I hear that word used a lot when someone is trying to make a point through emotion rather than reason. Also It smells very much like 'no true Scotsman' in my opinion.
For what it's worth my opinion is that violence can take all sorts of forms whether it be physical or psychological. Sacking a person involves a certain amount of violence as it is doing to someone something they don't want done to them.
So I don't buy the physical violence being more barbaric than psychological violence argument - that is pure sophistry.
On the topic of school yard bullies - a fast appropriate response has always worked in my experience, it is the speed that counts as it conditions the bully to understand that their actions have consequences(now you have to use your intelligence to figure out what 'appropriate' means as it will vary in each situation).
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
I wasn't proposing that psychological violence is in any way less damaging than physical. Perhaps 'barbarian' was a poor choice of word at that point.
As to 'professional', I simply meant those with specialist training in the management of bullying of any sort. I think it's a more than fair representation of the consensus of opinion amongst teachers, social workers, psychologists etc. (amongst whom I have walked lest it be considered that I have no experience here) that hitting back, whether immediately or at some remove (punishments etc.) forms no part of a rational strategy for tackling bullying be it physical or psychological intimidation.
|
|
|
|
|
More than that, we should teach kids to stick together and fight for what's right. There's too much individualism these days..
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Except, at times, this creates Mob Mentality.
The majority is not always right. Maybe not right even half the time.
The best balance is to be balanced.
|
|
|
|
|
Right is whatever the majority say right is.. logically if you disagree with that then you're in the minority.
The alternative is what we have in Europe right now - everyone keeps their heads down, no matter how wrong something is. They might mumble a few disapproving sounds if they're brave enough, but nobody actually does anything to put things right..
Eventually somebody has to take a stand, it's either your side or theirs and what we choose to do (or not do) ultimately shapes the society we live in 
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Having been there; it is rather effective.
Someone who is afraid you smash their head in with the first available chair will think twice about making a remark. Would you bully a psychopath? 
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Would you bully a psychopath?
As you can do it remotely and anonymously employing social media, email, texting etc., why not? You don't need to lay a finger on anyone to hound them to self-harm or suicide. Anyone who identifies themselves as likely to crack a chair over your head will these days effectively be marking themselves as a target rather than asserting their authority.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 9082365 wrote: As you can do it remotely and anonymously employing social media, email, texting etc., why not?
Most of them gang up to find anonimity, but it will not be random strangers. You'll have a good idea who's involved.
Member 9082365 wrote: Anyone who identifies themselves as likely to crack a chair over your head will these days effectively be marking themselves as a target rather than asserting their authority.
Yes, that's what kids are told. And they should go complain to the teacher, and not hit back. Now that is asking for more - it will be showing the group that the individual cannot defend itself. If a prior target starts to stand up, then yes, the new position in the group will be challenged. Or to quote a similar idea from a movie;
"Knocking him down won the first fight. I wanted to win all the next ones, too. So they'd leave me alone."
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
The problem here is that the targets of bullying are not chosen at random. They have already demonstrated that in some area of their life they are not able to defend themselves. That's what I mean about escalation. In order to hit back in a purely physical sense, for example, a victim will need to start an arms race. They will either have to tool up, gang up, or find a champion (my Dad's bigger than your Dad).
|
|
|
|
|
Member 9082365 wrote: The problem here is that the targets of bullying are not chosen at random.
How would it make stuff easier if they were? I do not see the lack of randomness as a problem, it is merely an observation.
Also seems to be that it is always the weakest individual from the group that is selected. Could it be animal behaviour with an evolutionary purpose, working against us?
Member 9082365 wrote: a victim will need to start an arms race
That is what I recommend, yes. If the group singles you out because you are perceived as the weakest, you change the perception.
Member 9082365 wrote: They will either have to tool up, gang up, or find a champion (my Dad's bigger
than your Dad).
There's more options, like changing group.
Tooling up is a bad idea, finding a champion is even worse. If you need someones protection just to be in the group, you're actually affirming that you are an easy target.
Grouping up works, in multiple ways; not only did you change from a hostile group to one that isn't, it is also a deterrence. Have them take self-defense classes; that way one is prepared for the drunk grown bully in the store that suddenly draws a knife.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
Had some one give me a 1 on article I wrote, fair enough he did not like it. I can live with that, the comment though "Does Not Work" makes me think he just down loaded the source and compiled it and tried to run it with out reading the text. Does this happen often to others as this would appear to be the second person who has tried to run the code with out reading the article.
Glenn
|
|
|
|
|
glennPattonBackInThePUB wrote: Does this happen often
Yes. Nuff said!
|
|
|
|
|
Oh yes, it happens. More than you'd probably think.
Even in QA, you can tell somebody how to do basic SQL:
SELECT * FROM MyTable
And you get a comment that it doesn't work. *There is an error "Invalid object name 'MyTable'"*
I think there are far, far too many students who don't want to learn this stuff and assume that whatever they find must do exactly what they want without modification at all. And get upset when it doesn't... 
I'll balance the downvote in a moment.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manfred R. Bihy wrote: "I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability!"
Ron White, Comedian
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
Manfred R. Bihy wrote: So whining and pulling sh*t like this into the lounge still works?
+5,000,000 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: ven in QA, you can tell somebody how to do basic SQL:
SELECT * FROM MyTable
And you get a comment that it doesn't work. *There is an error "Invalid object name 'MyTable'"*
Hate to say it but he may be right. I got a similar error when I tried your query...
|
|
|
|
|
Have you found the Any key yet?
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes even the comment to a 5 is dumb... 
|
|
|
|
|
I would have upvoted that, but I'm afraid you'll find it dumb... 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
So I downloaded the code, it compiled and ran without issues. It was not entirely obvious that I had to click on "Ports" to get a list of available COM ports -- why not just auto-initialize the list?
Also, labels for what the different pulldowns are would be helpful: baud rate, parity, stop bits, etc.
As to actually testing it with another device, I didn't do that as my breakout box is somewhere in storage. 
As to downloading the source without reading the text -- I didn't read the whole text either. I mean, it's a great article, but if there are special instructions for getting things working, I'd suggest at the top of the article, as a major heading "How To Run The Code" so that I don't have to read the whole article to figure out what it is I'm supposed to do. Now, I'm an old hand at RS-232, but there's a lot of youngins that aren't.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm,
Quote: It was not entirely obvious that I had to click on "Ports" to get a list of available COM ports -- why not just auto-initialize the list?
Well I suppose that could just auto init the list but I was thinking that I had to do some reverse engineering to figure things out when I was learning. I was wanting to make it more obvious. 
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
