Quite the contrary. I want to see someone back up what they say with an example. Doesn't even have to be their own work, just a site they think does something better than the one they're bashing. Or give some ideas ... something ...Originally Posted by gparis
yes, at that moment (around 4 years ago) i was
My comment was more about the fact that your first points were valid (tertiary - why not - changes from back/next/home, etc. totally agree on that).
But i disliked the little attack on Moot (wanting to see his own work - semi-assuming it's bad... etc.) I've seen people do that in this forum when they get shocked or angry, and i don't think it elevates the debate.
gparis
Critique comes with examples or suggestions on how something is done better - not just ripping apart everything someone did because you can. Slamming something and yet having no ideas, examples, suggestions or work of your own that says "this is how it could be done better" ... is just b!tching.
It's part of my problem with the culture of debate these days: certain people can say whatever they want about someone/something else ... unfounded or not (especially when who they're slamming is a 'bigger entity') ... but if someone else comes along and asks "well, what would you do to make it better?", someone will tell you that's not fair to ask that.
I seek credibility when someone is so ardently attacking something. Tell me what is better. Show me what is better. Could YOU do it better ... because if they couldn't when given the chance, I'm not sure how valid their argument can be ... again, it's just whining with no credibility.
A Flash Developer Resource Site
