While surfing the vast and crapulent Internets I’ve seen many a blog post kind, but one of the more insidious1 is the “Why I Don’t ____”2 variety. Typically the premise of such posts starts as why the blogger “don’t use some programming language”, “don’t like cake” or “don’t not club baby seals” and follows up with a laundry list of points – some of them perfectly valid. However, the reason these types of posts are particularly yucky is that they tend to be written in a way that implies that anecdotal evidence is important. That’s not to say that anecdotes are valueless, only that they are worth very little. For any given circumstance where I might do anything, there are only a handful of relationships to said thing:
Therefore the value of anecdote for each case is:
Anecdote provides a data point for use in an eventual investigation
The anecdote may illuminate some aspect I’ve not thought about or it may not apply to me, in which case I’ll disagree
The anecdote may only serve as an irritant.
You’re preaching to the choir
In the two cases where the “Why I Don’t ___” post provides useful data the value is either slight or rare to occur. However, the true punch comes in the negative cases. The Internet is fueled on negativity, but anecdotal negativity does not tend to supply useful information. I understand how fun it is to make fun of programming languages and frameworks, but for serious work involving their domains then due diligence is absolutely required – professionalism demands it.
So why are you writing your “Why I Don’t ___” post? Do you hope to provide valueable information, or are you simply trying to spout off? I don’t very often find occasion to quote _why the Lucky Stiff, but in this case it’s appropriate:
when you don’t create things, you become defined by your tastes rather than ability. your tastes only narrow & exclude people. so create.
Create indeed.
:F
As I might have expected, Reginald Braithwaite wrote about this very topic before.↩︎
The post type of “Why I love ____” is similarly useless, but at least they tend to play up the strengths of their targets.↩︎