>Among other things it's a teaching lab and there comes a point at which the teacher has to say to the student "it's time you started learning."

Then why not say just that, instead of making sarcastic remarks to the student when you have simply "had enough".

>So count me in Terry's corner.

Its immaterial to me which corner you are in. The point is not whether Terry is right or correct in feeling aggrieved, its simply the content and delivery of his message to "M". It was extremely sarcastic, aimed at a non-native English speaker and certainly not commensurate with the student/teacher analogy referred to in your first point above.

>I've provided M some answers (occasionally they've even been useful ones) and I've watched Terry and others provide orders of magnitude more. I don't mind providing M with help for legitimate questions and will continue to do so.

Good for you.

>When did "software engineer" become a pompous term for "programmer"? Perhaps it's semantics for you, but the terms have different connotations to me.

The internationally famous hair stylist Vidal Sasoon still has "barber" on his passport. At the end of the day, he is simply a barber. If you think "software engineer" is different to "programmer", then that is clearly your prerogative. Again, without wishing to sound "cheesy", in the words of Billy Joel when referring to all of the supposedly new and different genres of music, "its still Rock n' Roll to me". Its pretty funny at my office where employees have to place their job title in their e-mail sig block. You wouldn't believe the variations - Computer Programmer, Software Engineer, Software Architect, Software Developer and the list goes on. They are all sat in the same office doing exactly the same job. Until software development evolves to that of a true engineering discipline, to me, "software engineer" remains a somewhat pompous term for a "programmer".

>I know language evolves over time, and I know that we are in a period of bastardizing English in an attempt to removing supposedly sexist structures and maybe one of these days "they" and "them" will become both a gender neutral singular and plural pronoun. But, at the moment, the male pronoun is still used in gender neutral contexts.

Thanks for the somewhat unnecessary explanation.

>Since I refuse to believe that of you, I'll just say that this kind of sarcastic, irrelevant personal attacks can only serve to undermine the legitimacy of your primary arguement. (I obviously don't agree with it, but it certainly is legitmate)

Please refer to message #1024292 if you want evidence of a personal attack. I recall Terry's instruction to me was to "Go and boil your head you sad little man." - is that personal enough for you? <s>

But I digress. With respect, my primary argument seems lost on you (refer to my first point herein) although you appear to un-wittingly keep re-inforcing it on my behalf. The sarcasm you perceive in the statement you refer to above merely serves to rebuke Terry's sarcasm with "M" (re-read his message to "M" and tell me it is not sarcastic - moreover, it undermines Terry's benevolence in helping "M" in the first instance). It appears that a few of the folks that have "sided" with Terry are likewise victims of frustration with "M" and have similarly missed my point.

I believe Marcia Akins said elsewhere in this thread that her frustration with "M" lead her to simply refrain from answering any more of his questions. I would be willing to bet that in her last interaction with "M", she didn't suggest that he "installed pcAnywhere so she could dial in and debug his code while he drank coffee". So, I refer to my original message to Terry :-

"If you feel this way, why keep answering the man's questions?"

I believe this is precisely what Marcia did, as confirmed in her later post. This is the gist of my argument with Terry, nothing more, nothing less. I re-iterate that the petty squabbles that have subsequently emanated over mere phraseology are nothing more than semantics.