>>>>>>>>>I believe the point is that we all should have the knee-jerk reaction to stick to standards and best practices first. That is the difference between modern medicine and Dr. Frankenstein.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I believe that the best practice in a technical forum is answer the darn question, even if you do not agree with the goal, and the question here was not about standards or best practices, in particular when the question, like this one, is asked without context, so we cannot assume he ignores said best practices for it is very arrogant to make such assumptions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Not when you've seen what I've seen. There are too many without any knowledge of standards, too many that just barely get things operational and there are too many ways to do everything and many years of practice just seems to strengthen bad habits. That means a high likelihood of doing it wrong. Hence the Programming Mess thread. I never said only do it the best way. I said that should be the first reaction. I always ask more about the environment - the questioner should be forthcoming without anyone having to ask for more details too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Nah...I'd have to agree with Hugo on this. IMO, responses to the OP should answer the question first. If you then need to give a lecture about why they shouldn't be doing so is secondary and optional. Who knows, maybe you'll actually convince them to change their ways.
>>>>>
>>>>>Ounce of prevention beats a pound of cure. Give the OP the answer - which by asking proves he's not good enough to do it - means he'll then run with it. I've seen a system which would have killed patients all because they went down the wrong path assuming they knew enough.
>>>>
>>>>Mike, when I read Hugo's reply which described you as "arrogant", I though that he was a bit harsh on you. Your words, "...he's not good enough..." show me that I was wrong. Dude, get down off your high horse!
>>>
>>>I meant that he may not be good enough. Although, again, if you have to ask, that means you did not know the answer yourself.
>>
>>You, sir, are one arrogant $0B and you also "were not good enough". I know a little bit of your job seeking history ;) Its all making more sense to me now.
>
>I did not mean you personally. I meant if one has to ask, they obviously do not know the answer and that means they are not good enough to deal with the question.
>
>Your statement is unprofessional and constitutes libel under Canadian law.

Ouch, I touched a nerve did I? OK then. That's the last I'm going to have anything to do with you. Now how do I find that Twit list...