[pwdisswordfish4]

> I think this is a little harsh

Only if you read the question and assume that it is something besides a question. How does a person ask the question that I asked and mark it unambiguously as a question, not a statement (and do it without unnecessary baggage)? How do I convince people to answer the question instead of reply the way you did, to something you received instead of what I asked? Is that question not tolerable (it got flagged) but the other commenter's is fine?

[smarx007]

Yes, I think you should assume something else.

I provided a reply above from my point of view: I use a computer that has English as a primary language, my Chrome install is also English and I don't live in Ukraine. And of course, I have never added Ukrainian language in my Chrome settings. And yet it "guessed" that I speak Ukrainian. The key bit here is that browsers may modify the list of languages even after you go to the settings and remove all languages except for English (for the record, Chrome also "forgets" that I told it never to translate Ukrainian after I remove Ukrainian from the Accept-Language settings, which is annoying).

So, I guess you are a native English speaker and simply never had any exposure to this "customer journey". I hope my explanation gives you a glimpse into why an experienced software engineer may be still surprised to see a website detect a language they are not using in the system.

[pwdisswordfish4]

I think you replied to the wrong thread.

[resu_nimda]

It comes off as condescending. Generally, being incredulous of the way someone thinks isn't a respectful way to engage with them (I'm sure most of us are guilty of it at times, but usually in frustration with people that we have a personal relationship with). If you're going to ask someone something that might offend them, I would suggest starting with a show of goodwill. Also, extensive use of hypothetical "thought-quotes" is very easily construed as mocking or belittling, even if you were just trying to be precise about your meaning.

A better way to ask might have been: "I'm curious, and I don't mean to be rude, but what caused you to post this comment here instead of searching for the answer?"

[pwdisswordfish4]

That recommendation strikes me as much closer to an attempt to make a statement with a rhetorical question than the question I actually asked. Even the most charitable assumption of good faith would most likely yield a response lacking detail and devoid of any insights that I was after.

[resu_nimda]

You could add that "I'm asking because the process of typing an off-topic comment on a forum and waiting for replies strikes me as an inefficient way to get an answer to this question, and I'm genuinely trying to understand that thought process."

I highly doubt it would have performed worse than your strategy, which at best resulted in a derail about tone, and at worst scared off the person you were asking and others who may have otherwise taken time to give the deep and thoughtful answer you were looking for.

It seems clear that you find niceties and pleasantries to be not genuine or unnecessary, and I can sympathize, but they go a long way in terms of making people feel comfortable and opening up to you.

[pwdisswordfish4]

> It seems clear that you find niceties and pleasantries to be not genuine or unnecessary

Wrong. It seems clear you all like making assumptions and treating them as unshakeable truth.

I scarcely think that your suggested wording (your second attempt, keep in mind) would have satisfied even you without this conversational backdrop providing context.

> I highly doubt it would have performed worse than your strategy,

Those aren't the goalposts we're shooting for. You've subtly given yourself an easier target to hit than the one that was presented.

[resu_nimda]

> Wrong. It seems clear you all like making assumptions and treating them as unshakeable truth.

Can you explain, then, why 1) your original post was devoid of any such language, and 2) you dismissed my suggestion, which added some, as being likely to cynically have the opposite effect of what was intended?

I get what you're saying. People often do couch cynicism and trolling in pleasantries. Which makes it difficult to appear genuine when asking a tough question like that. But that means you have to try extra hard if you want results, not give up entirely and go full autism on someone that clearly isn't going to respond well to that.

[pwdisswordfish4]

There's a perverse irony in the way your responses here exude condescension while ostensibly trying educate and inform about the sort of things that people respond to. Although it looks like you came here to argue (which now explains the presumptuousness), I didn't, and I'm not wasting any (more) of my time indulging you.

> I get what you're saying. People often do couch cynicism and trolling in pleasantries.

No, apparently you don't, because that's not at all what I said or what I'm trying to say. Aside from failing at that, you almost succeeded at deflecting, but not quite. The attempt to change the subject and avoid responding directly is yet more reason to stop this here.

[scpedicini]

Because your question reads as a relatively transparent thinly veiled insult, like you're questioning his ability to be curious about the world, and contributes very little to the discussion.

[pwdisswordfish4]

You haven't given me anything actionable. Read the question I asked, understand against your instincts that it is a question and not the insult you assumed it to be, and then tell me a way to ask that question that doesn't make you feel the way you do right now. Is there one?

Disagree strongly on "contributes very little to the discussion".