Re: OT Bull-fight avoidance (was: Why all the max length constraints?)

"Keith H Duggar" <duggar_at_alum.mit.edu> wrote in message news:1148860282.233102.190330_at_38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> mAsterdam wrote:
> > dawn wrote:
> > > If people want to tell me how ignorant I am, I don't
> > > mind agreeing.
>
> Are you honestly sure about that?
>
> > > I have anecdotal, but not scientific, evidence that men
> > > are less inclined to admit ignorance or even to show it
> > > with their questions.

> Even if that generalization were true (I'm a man and
> /readily/ admit ignorance and accept superior reasoning when
> it is demonstrated), how is it relevant to this discussion?
> Why do you keep bringing up irrelevant facts such as your
> gender, the house your daughter owns, the awards the other
> received, etc? Do you /want/ us to pigeonhole you as an
> irrational emotional hormonal woman?

Some men are likely to call women 'irrational' :-)

> > It takes more stamina to show ignorance in this newsgroup
> > now, than it did say a year ago. I have recently refrained
> > from asking questions revealing ignorance because of
> > anticipated reactions here - even when it would just be
> > about exact wording.

> Strange, not my experience here at all. I dropped by a few
> weeks ago, readily admitted I was ignorant, participated a
> little, asked some questions, and was treated VERY
> well. When asking database related questions I tried to do
> so with humility and was not vociferous. Could this have
> been a factor in my treatment?

> Perhaps your hesitancy has more to do with personal pride?
> If so you could create an alternate google account (I would
> go for "y" to match up with "x") and post questions using
> that account. Perhaps you will discover good treatment and
> relax enough to post questions from you main account.

Funny. 'Y' is the first word I said when I arrived on this world. The reply was WOW, I was told.
Over the years, the reply became 'because'. :-) Received on Mon May 29 2006 - 11:56:56 CEST