Clear and Present Shitfuck

Whenever I run into a dead-end in Revit (which is replete with dead-ends... almost by design), I always find it amusing to search online for information on how to accomplish whatever basic task it is that has me at a standstill.

The results are always the same - hundreds of unrelated topics, any of which can be clicked on and the same exact conversation will be going on, regardless of the topic, forum, etc. - and it won't have anything to do with whatever discipline the people claim to represent.  It turns architecture/engineering into a constant process of chasing various commands through contextual Ribbon interface (whoever thought that up needs 50 lashes), or having to work around the inherent (and well known - even by the 'faithful) limitations of Revit.

What you get instead of answers are literal walls of text describing convoluted multi-step procedures and workarounds written by people who are generally more interested in stroking their own egos than addressing the actual topic (that is, if the discussion hasn't already degraded into Revitbots deriding people for not doubling down on the Revit dick).

God help someone if they mention ACAD, or needing something to work like it has for fucking decades.  It's like watching a school of piranha descend on a helpless swimmer, who is just trying to get the fuck back to shore.  Even the people who are trying to be helpful are like the guy in the boat that keeps tossing ropes in the water for the guy to grab hold of, but neglects to hold onto the other end.

It's telling when people have to preface their questions by swearing an oath of fealty to Revit and BIM in order to head off attacks from the people who have designated themselves as 'Defenders Of The Revit'.

When you tout a piece of software as being capable of easily accomplishing a given task, but then immediately have to start back-pedaling and explaining the drawn-out process that accomplishing that task requires (if it doesn't, in fact, require 3rd party software to do it) then you are misrepresenting it (at best) and are a fucking liar (at best).

And even that is better than the ones who just reject the idea that there is even an issue - the classic 'why do you need to do that?' or 'I just do it like this' ignores the fact that whoever they are working for, submitting to, being reviewed by, etc. may simply not accept 'just doing it like this'. 

I mentioned the way Revitards have managed to start getting their alternative approaches accepted by various state/city/county agencies, jurisdictions, authorities, etc. - and are now being faced with regulations based on those approaches that exceed what is currently being done (even by firms who are 100% Revit/BIM).

What they were basically trying to pull an end run  - to force their customers into having to pay additional fees for Reviting (that are still insufficient for the amount of time and work necessary to accomplish this), and of course - to force any ACAD holdouts into using the software.

Even now, most of the people that aren't directly involved in the design (owners, developers, contractors, etc.) don't even know what the fuck Revit is, aren't interested in learning about it, and certainly aren't going to shell out the obscene amount of money for software licenses, the necessary hardware and infrastructure to run it, or the extensive training to get their people up to speed.

Even years later, the whole 'If you don't Revit/BIM you will be left in the dust' line is *STILL* fucking bullshit, because the only dust Revitards are kicking up is what little remains of their fees.
They tried to claim it was 'inevitable' (inrevitable?), instead of making it functional - and that ladies and gentlemen is the dictionary definition of 'bullshit'.

The ones defending it are the bullshit bucket carriers, but at the end of the day all they are left with is a bucket of shit.