McGruff wrote:There's too much bad temper surrounding OOP v procedural discussions and I'm a bit fed up with members getting caught up in the crossfire. That will make people reluctant to ask questions and that's not acceptable.
Now that this post has been moved, I feel its more appropriate for me to comment. I've avoided commenting on this issue in the original thread because I completely agree with McGruff - it results in threads that are half learning-experience, and half heated discussion.
However, in this case, the initiating comment came not only from a moderator, but specifically from McGruff (the person endorsing the stance that we should encourage discussion).
The comment McGruff made was:
McGruff wrote:No-one who has learned OOP properly would go back to procedural code.
Which is provably false and insulting to the class of individuals that would disagree with his position
The statement means that either, you won't do anything but OOP (because you've learned it properly), OR, you haven't learned it properly. If you have in fact learned OOP properly, and do in fact "go back" to procedural code, then you will feel insulted, as I did.
Just like if I said "All OOP proponents are bigoted", I would be insulting and provably inaccurate. Its inappropriate by McGruff's standards, and by the rules of the forum.
So restating BDKR's comment, I'll ask what I've asked several times before - Please follow the rules of the forum, if you are going to enforce them on others.
The statement was entirely inappropriate, and at the time I was in such a good mood, I responded in a very light-hearted fashion to encourage focusing on the important issues and not on personal attacks. Perhaps I should have done so via PM, but by the same consideration, the comment shouldn't have been made by McGruff in public, in the first place.
Since I'm not a mod, its hard for me to correct the inappropriate actions of a member without a public comment. But apparently, even mods have a hard time calling McGruff on inappropriate actions.
I don't want to start, continue, or encourage trouble. However, I don't see how McGruff can honestly argue that the comment was anything but against the rules of the forums. It shows no respect for people of a different opinion than his. And by McGruff's standard (Encourage open discussion) it causes just the opposite effect.
Thoughts?