Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7279165" data-attributes="member: 16814">Well, this is a bit lazy, isn't it?  The thread that spawned it has posts that clearly lay out exactly why people find lazy to be unfair, and exactly why it was inappropriate in the case discussed.  Also, it clearly laid out the difference between criticism and arm-chair quarterbacking.  Being willing to write multiple paragraphs that completely fail to correctly represent the arguments you're questioning while also indicating that you're aware of the source material is seems like you might actually be intentionally stirring the pot.  I'll take your word you aren't, though, and just assume you read but didn't understand the multiple explanations in the other thread.Work cannot be lazy.  Only people can be lazy.  If you call a work lazy, you are explicitly saying that those that did the work were lazy about it.  When the work is an almost 200 page book that has a handful of minor, quickly addressed and corrected errors, that's not lazy, that's accidental.  Calling that lazy exposes 1) disrespect for people that actually work hard  and 2) a misunderstanding of the work actually involved.  Sadly, calling the mistakes lazy might win you points with others inclined to not think through the work and effort involved, but for those that are aware it just marks you as ignorant.  Don't be ignorant.And that led into armchair quarterbacking, which differs from criticism because it assumes the work is a) easy and b) something that the criticizer could do better.  Unless you've actually tried to proof a document of that size you really have no idea of the difficulty involved.  I didn't.  I assumed that since I wrote well and could successfully edit my coursework, that editing was easy.  When I joined a team that produced professional technical information on a national scale, I learned that I was grossly in error.  Editing large, detailed works where you have to use consistent phrasing to avoid confusion is extremely hard.  We had four review cycles, the last two of which involved different teams of professional editors, and we never, never had a document make it through the fourth review without discovering at least one error.  And we had a decent bit of slop in our schedules so we could 'slid right' if we needed more time to perfect a copy.  Despite all of that, we would occasionally print something in error and have to correct it, so even with a large, well-funded team with independent editing teams in independent reviews, errors can still happen.  That certainly isn't lazy.Mistakes happen.  Pointing those mistakes out, even lamenting them, is perfectly good -- even helpful.  What's not helpful is assuming that the work is easy (it's not) and leveling insulting terms at the hardworking people that made it (they certainly aren't lazy).But, hey, I have little belief that this will convince anyone to value other people's work.  How many threads do we have that complain about how WotC is screwing them over by expecting them to pay for digital content when they could just pirate it?</blockquote>

Verification