i've been adding a lot of "rules" to my posts on here about what kind of replies I want ("no starting arguments!” "no explaining what a git commit is!”)
Here's a thread about why! Some of my goals are:
1. have nuanced discussions & stay on topic
2. hear from a diverse set of people
3. learn new things about how people use computers
let’s talk about each of them!
(1/11)
goal 1 is: have nuanced discussions! stay on topic!
When I started writing about git on here, every single time I made a post, people would reply with a HUGE range of thoughts and opinions about git which were totally unrelated to the question I asked.
This was a problem because it meant we could only have extremely surface level-discussions, and people’s hot takes were VERY repetitive. It felt like I was in a time loop — I even made a bingo card about it https://wizardzines.com/comics/git-discussion-bingo
(2/11)
When I say things like “please do not reply saying that you prefer rebase over merge”, it’s not because I think people who prefer rebase are “wrong”.
It’s because I’m trying to dig deeper and have a more nuanced discussion about a specific topic and I don’t want a very common opinion (“rebase is better than merge!”) to drown out other perspectives.
(3/11)
Julia Evans
Paul David