[FoRK] complaint - please ignore :)
Wed Sep 21 07:29:13 PDT 2005
Andy Armstrong wrote:
> On 20 Sep 2005, at 18:25, rst at ai.mit.edu wrote:
>> If your misery loves company, head over to thedailywtf.com. I'm
>> thinking in particular of the item from a couple months back about a
>> *really* denormalized database:
> What is it with Slashdot generation geeks that they think that a
> forum reply that merely restates the original post somehow adds
> something to the debate?
> "So the developers figure that that they should 'get with the times'
> and start using a relational db - problem is, they don't have a f'ing
> clue as to how to use it."
> Yes. That's what the original post says.
Right! The original post is there for anyone to read, but then they have
to restate it in their own words, just so they can "contribute". For
one of the replies went:
"So the developers figure that that they should 'get with the times'
and start using a relational db - problem is, they don't have a f'ing
clue as to how to use it."
But that was EXACTLY the point of the original post.
More information about the FoRK