Timeline for Why do programmers use 'we' so often?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 16, 2013 at 0:26 | history | migrated | to programmers.stackexchange.com | ||
| Feb 26, 2013 at 10:02 | comment | added | Kramii | @StoneyB: We feel your pain. | |
| Feb 26, 2013 at 1:41 | comment | added | Dan D. | I would definitely edit "Q: Can we clone a repository if we are a valid user?" to "Q: Can I clone a repository if I am a valid user?". As 'I' ranges over all people individually rather than 'we' which ranges over groups of people collectively. | |
| Feb 25, 2013 at 21:36 | comment | added | Pharap | @StoneyB Not unexpected, it's one of those things that appear less significant from the outside. However I (and a fellow programmer I often discuss such things with) both agree that in most circumstances the usage of 'we' feels patronising, which is contrary to the writer's intention in most cases. Ultimately it's a matter of opinion, but it's people's opinions on the matter that I'm interested in. | |
| Feb 25, 2013 at 21:28 | comment | added | Sven Yargs | Or perhaps we're just lonely. | |
| Feb 25, 2013 at 21:23 | comment | added | StoneyB on hiatus | @Pharap Alternatives, yes; better, enh. None of them bother me. | |
| Feb 25, 2013 at 21:19 | comment | added | Pharap | @StoneyB I personally see nothing wrong with using wording such as "Is is possible to close a repository as a valid user" or "Can you clone a repository if you're a valid user". While it could be argued these are quite informal for a Q&A site, I would argue that questions like these are more familiar and easier to read. Ultimately my question was more aiming at why the odd usage of 'we' is so common among programmers, but regardlessly my point about there being better alternatives is clear, right? | |
| Feb 25, 2013 at 21:06 | comment | added | StoneyB on hiatus | @Pharap It's not illogical but rhetorically precise: on SE questions are deemed to be asked both of and on behalf of the entire community, and of users-yet-to-come. And it's a damn sight less annoying than the impersonal one. | |
| Feb 25, 2013 at 21:00 | comment | added | Pharap | The situations I usually encounter it in were more akin to patronising explanations than talking about programmers as a whole. Generally the usage seems illogical in a lot of contexts programmers use 'we' in. For example: "Q: When should we release an object if we are returning it?", the asker is clearly referring to themselves, but chose to use 'we' instead of a more logically formatted question. A more ridiculous example would be "Q: Can we clone a repository if we are a valid user?" in which the plural 'we' is at conflict with the singular 'user'. | |
| Feb 25, 2013 at 20:57 | comment | added | StoneyB on hiatus | @MετάEd Pretty good now I've got that off my chest. | |
| Feb 25, 2013 at 20:56 | comment | added | MetaEd | Now tell us how you really feel. | |
| Feb 25, 2013 at 20:55 | comment | added | StoneyB on hiatus | @MετάEd Wikipedia may call it the authorial we, but I contemn the authorial we and scorn to practice it: I fought hard with my dissertation advisor to discard the pretentious and irresponsible authorial we and replace it with the veracious authorial I. | |
| Feb 25, 2013 at 20:51 | comment | added | MetaEd | Wikipedia calls this the author’s we. | |
| Feb 25, 2013 at 20:50 | history | answered | StoneyB on hiatus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |