Warnock's Dilemma


The act of choosing whether the lack of response [to a discussion-list post] is because of its brilliance (there's nothing to add) or because of its stupidity (it doesn't deserve comment).

from the original post by Brian Warnock :

The problem with no response is that there are five possible interpretations:

1) The post is correct, well-written information that needs no follow-up commentary. There's nothing more to say except "Yeah, what he said."

2) The post is complete and utter nonsense, and no one wants to waste the energy or bandwidth to even point this out.

3) No one read the post, for whatever reason.

4) No one understood the post, but won't ask for clarification, for whatever reason.

5) No one cares about the post, for whatever reason.

Most of the time, there's not even a group consensus on the reason. It has to do more with the individual psyche than anything else. (For instance, I tend to take no replies to my posts as #5, #4, #2, or #3, in that order.)

The real issue is that the problem may not go away. Most of time, the #1s, #2s and #4s of the world don't realize why they're being stupidiotic, and how to best unhork themselves for all's concern.


keywords: warnock, dilemma, law, observation, rule, post, reply
date: 04/06/2005