I spell things wrong all the time and sometimes hominem doesn't get caught by the spell checker. So fucking what? It's ironic that you call this out because, well, it's an ad hominem argument in and of itself. You are attacking one thing (or supporting one thing) to prove another point. Wikipedia says it best, "claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact". Claiming AWS isn't practicing amatuer hour based on the fact they rolled out fixes in 48 hours is making an ad hominem argument. Amazon's marketing department is distinctly different from their engineering department. It's irrelevant that they are technically competent enough to patch this when you consider the fact the marketing/communications department could give two shits about how they tell anyone what has been fixed.
In retrospect, what I should have done is called out the blaming statements you made in your first post. That's what brought me to action and caused me to write my response the way I did. I should know better than trying to rationalize with someone who is in dissonance. BTW, narrowrail called you out below for this blaming statement here. Pay attention - people are giving you feedback. Take it or leave it.
Vote down all my comments if that makes you feel better. Karma is meant to burn. It's also a tell that this story dropped off the main page and I'm still getting downvotes on my comment. AWS koolaid much?
Oh, and FWIW, I am a super sleuth. A super sleuth of human behavior and emotional response. I also watch what I say about others, trying not to blame and indicate opinion where needed. That's why I said your behaviors were a 'tell on intent'. I have no idea who you are or why you created an account just to comment on this story, but I guarantee there is more to it than what meets the eye.
Comments
I spell things wrong all the time and sometimes hominem doesn't get caught by the spell checker. So fucking what? It's ironic that you call this out because, well, it's an ad hominem argument in and of itself. You are attacking one thing (or supporting one thing) to prove another point. Wikipedia says it best, "claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact". Claiming AWS isn't practicing amatuer hour based on the fact they rolled out fixes in 48 hours is making an ad hominem argument. Amazon's marketing department is distinctly different from their engineering department. It's irrelevant that they are technically competent enough to patch this when you consider the fact the marketing/communications department could give two shits about how they tell anyone what has been fixed.
In retrospect, what I should have done is called out the blaming statements you made in your first post. That's what brought me to action and caused me to write my response the way I did. I should know better than trying to rationalize with someone who is in dissonance. BTW, narrowrail called you out below for this blaming statement here. Pay attention - people are giving you feedback. Take it or leave it.
Vote down all my comments if that makes you feel better. Karma is meant to burn. It's also a tell that this story dropped off the main page and I'm still getting downvotes on my comment. AWS koolaid much?
Oh, and FWIW, I am a super sleuth. A super sleuth of human behavior and emotional response. I also watch what I say about others, trying not to blame and indicate opinion where needed. That's why I said your behaviors were a 'tell on intent'. I have no idea who you are or why you created an account just to comment on this story, but I guarantee there is more to it than what meets the eye.