Re: Kickstarter was not successful... but it did help things...

[Doc O'Leary]

In article <mailman.10360.1387954424.10748.discuss-gnustep@gnu.org>,
 Richard Frith-Macdonald <richardfrithmacdonald@gmail.com> wrote:

> Clearly you don't use the standard meaning of the words 'brutal' and 
> 'science'.
> Science is an endeaviour of rationality and intellect.  Brutality is 
> anti-rational/anti-intellectual.

Nonsense.  That is mere ivory tower pontification.  A science like 
physics or biology is not just about controlled environments.  Even 
computer scientists need to face the harsh reality of a world beyond 
mathematics and code.  Through science we can reflect on both 
irrationality and stupidity.  Brutality is in no way the antithesis of 
that.

> In what way does that demonstrate that gnustep is hostile to OSX users?
> In what way does that demonstrate that gnustep is hostile to OSX users?
> In what way does that demonstrate that gnustep is hostile to OSX users?

It's almost as if I have been talking about *more* than one thing here.  
Shame on me for thinking more broadly than code, code, code.

> > Part of my point is that, yes, such things are *said* on the web site 
> > and elsewhere.  But if you actually sit down and think about it, if you 
> > apply the use case "I'm a Mac developer looking to try porting to 
> > GNUstep", the *full* body of evidence makes it obvious that GNUstep is 
> > not very welcoming.
> 
> Thankyou.  That sounds better than your original statement that GNUstep is 
> hostile.  Now we are beginning to get enough detail to know what you think a 
> problem is,

Beginning?  This was what I was saying back in November!  Shame on me 
for expecting to have been heard the first time . . .

> I don't know in what way you feel it's unwelcoming exactly  ... maybe in 
> several ways ... but if you addresed one at a time and suggested 
> improvements, then the people who have been working at trying to make GNUstep 
> appealing to OSX users would probably enjoy discussing those suggestions and 
> doing something more, rather than being put off.

Then jump in your time machine and go back to a time when I said those 
things.  Perhaps you responded, perhaps you didn't.  Perhaps it was 
negative, definitely it was dropped (until the thread got resurrected by 
Ivan).  And if you think things got any more welcoming in the past week, 
back into the time machine for you.  :-/

> Stop yourself and consider whether your behavior here is making any sense.
> Some people are just ignoring you, one person has suggested that we all 
> ignore you, that's just a normal reaction to insulting rhetoric.

I'll let the record speak for itself.  I'm not going to pretend I'm the 
most sophisticated person in the world, but how I have behaved is 
stellar compared to the juvenile and petty ways I have been treated.  
I'm not crying because I get it: you found a way to be part of an "in" 
crowd and so you engage in the all-too-predictable actions of tribal 
exclusion that usually follow.  That's all a bit too cultish for me, so 
all I can do is ask you to reconsider your actions.  I'll be on my way 
shortly if you're still not yet willing to do that.

> What people want are practical useful things (of any kind) suggested or done 
> rather than vague ideas.

Nothing I have in mind has been vague.  If I have not expressed them 
fully, it is because the leadership here has shown no interest in 
exploring them further.  I mean, I could go down a big ol' rabbit hole 
on the topic of brand messaging.  Feedback on having a slogan was mixed, 
though, and I don't see anyone in charge who seems to put value on such 
things.

> Note that I say 'suggested or done', not just 'done'.  Clearly everyone would 
> like *you* to be doing the work rather than *them* to be doing it (after all, 
> nobody wants to be loaded down with more work), but come up with good enough 
> practical suggestions that people can do in a reasonable timeframe, and 
> people will take on that extra work and thank you for the ideas.

Here's something that might blow your mind: *I* am more than happy to do 
the work, if it ever becomes clear that having a coherent message is 
worth it to the project.  What I'm *not* going to do is redesign the web 
site to my own personal liking in advance.

And it might also blow your mind to hear this, too: the world is *full* 
of developers who, like me, would rather work top-down than bottom-up.  
Hell, I'd settle for middle-out at this point.

> In particular, 
> you needed to insult Greg quite severely before the politeness of his 
> responses dropped to my level, and I don't think any of his responses have 
> been as insulting as the emails from you that he was responding to.

I'm not sure what insults you're talking about.  I mainly remember 
simply calling him out on his (still to this day) dismissiveness on the 
usefulness of anything that deviates from his notion of 
value/merit/contribution.  It's all there for anyone else to read and 
reach their own conclusions, though.  Go ahead and quote anything you 
think will paint me out to be a real bastard.

> If people are to value 
> your opinion then you will need to work up to it.

And that's a two way street.  When I say "Mac users coming to the web 
site are left high and dry", the response shouldn't just be "yeah, we 
should fix that at some point" or "yeah, you should fix that for us".  
To actually be welcoming, it should be more along the lines of "Yeah, 
here's what we really think and here's how we back that up, and if 
you're good at putting that kind of thing together, could you help us by 
coming up with a better site design?"

> > It indeed is.  But, again, what is the point in doing so if the 
> > leadership doesn't actually place the *underlying reason* for providing 
> > such a thing as a priority issue for the GNUstep project?  Perhaps my 
> > time is better spent on other things.  I'm trying to profile before I 
> > optimize, which apparently makes me a jerkwad in this upside down world.
> 
> There's so much wrong with that statement:
> 1. It seems clear you *still* haven't paid any attention to what the website 
> and the emails in this thread have said about what GNUstep is and what its 
> aims are or you'd know already that being OSX friendly is a high priority 
> already, so all you need to do is pick things that will improve that.  If you 
> don't think a VM will help, then work out what will and address that instead.

Again, no.  It continues to be the case that *lip service* is paid to 
such issues.  Things have gotten *worse* when it comes to the message of 
Mac support, going from MacPorts to unsupported, to completely 
unmentioned.  All the evidence is in my favor.  I don't know why you 
continue to insist otherwise.

> 2. Don't just 'try to profile',  do it!  That's what people are telling you.  
> The information you need is out there but it seems you don't read/understand 
> it (and in fairness it's hard to do so), so you need to get involved.  When 
> profiling a progam you compile with profiling instrumentation and use tolls 
> to gather the information you need and analyse it.   if you don't get 
> involved in a project how can you expect to be able to learn enough to 
> optimise?

What do you think I've been doing here?  The problem remains that most 
of the people who've stepped forward to disagree with me have come with 
an argument that amounts to:

"Who are you to tell me that one of my functions is a problem?  I'm so 
awesome I don't need to profile anything!  You've probably never even 
written a line of code in your life.  Shut up until you have something 
worthwhile to contribute."

Of all the things that come to my mind about how I should respond to 
that kind of sentiment, not once have I come to the conclusion:

"What a great community.  I need to be a part of that."

-- 
iPhone apps that matter:    http://appstore.subsume.com/
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, localhost, googlegroups.com, theremailer.net,
    and probably your server, too.