3 ms·

> That letter didn't feel ungrateful or malicious at all to me, but I sure hope it didn't come off that way to others. It might have; software engineering is a

by Gorbzel 11y ago

> That letter didn't feel ungrateful or malicious at all to me, but I sure hope it didn't come off that way to others. It might have; software engineering is a big tent, and people who touch Github (in at least someway) no doubt comprise a huge part of it. Full disclaimer, I'm biased, as I opened an issue attempting to address some potential editorial/tone issues, and the initial response was not good (a big part of that may be questions of who exactly is "involved" with the letter. How should others become involved and contribute in a way the OPs feel is constructive?) As another commenter pointed out, not everything is so black and white. In this case, no one should be "beyond reproach", but what seem like simple issues to Issues may indeed be representative of strong product/technical decisions from an opinionated vendor. IMO it's not inherently clear that the people behind dear-github entirely recognized the nuance here. No one is looking to pick fights or troll anyone, because no, not everyone who is passionate about this issue is a meanie. That said, the original letter and the immediate response could be interpreted as brash, and to that end, I wouldn't be surprised that someone responded with thank-you-github as an opposite reaction.

hueving 11y ago
Evaluate the letter based on its content, not the authors.
DannoHung 11y ago
> Full disclaimer, I'm biased, as I opened an issue attempting to address some potential editorial/tone issues Is this your issue? https://github.com/dear-github/dear-github/issues/47 https://github.com/dear-github/dear-github/issues/47 If so, the way you've written your issue is almost incomprehensible and your point is seriously irrelevant to the requests made by the project creators.
- Gorbzel 11y ago
  I'll admit that it was later in the evening and has been a long week, and also that the line between being opinionated and being an opinionated jerk is sometimes thinner than it may initially seem. However, while it's not the normal type of (technical, to the point) issue that one sees on a github project in that it deals with questions of values, intentions, and whether all product companies that FOSS projects use have an obligation to maintain similar values as those projects, it's not irrelevant. It's absolutely central to why Github hasn't responded thus far and whether they'll even pay attention to this (and arguably if they should). But if we're lobbing attacks at one another, you don't even try to explain why it's "seriously" irrelevant. Also, the visible response I've gotten thus far from people claiming to be involved with this project has been nothing short of circlejerk. No measured consideration of what actions are being taken, no attempting to understand other people's viewpoints, nothing. Yet when I try to determine who's who and what's what, apparently that's irrelevant, even think it's always people claiming to be "involved" with dear-github who bring it up in the first place.
joshmanders 11y ago
> a big part of that may be questions of who exactly is "involved" with the letter. Being someone who's helping with the `dear-github` repo, why does WHO is behind the repo matter? Does it change the reflections of the community who've come out to support it and sign it?
- Gorbzel 11y ago
  We agree, I don't think it matters. I initially believed based on the "petition" nature of the letter and adding signatories that it was going to be an inclusive effort. Which is why I've asked and received absolutely no answer as to why one of the dear-github organizational "owners" (as labeled on Github) responses to my issue inquiry was to tell me who he was, then use that to determine my issue was not constructive.
  - carussell 11y ago
    > one of the dear-github organizational "owners" (as labeled on Github) responses to my issue inquiry was to tell me who he was, then use that to determine my issue was not constructive. Based on the issue linked above, it doesn't look like this is what happened. Although it may have happened through some other channel. What it looks like happened is that neither one of you were able to understand what the other's point was.

by Gorbzel 11y ago

hueving 11y ago

Evaluate the letter based on its content, not the authors.

DannoHung 11y ago

> Full disclaimer, I'm biased, as I opened an issue attempting to address some potential editorial/tone issues Is this your issue? https://github.com/dear-github/dear-github/issues/47 https://github.com/dear-github/dear-github/issues/47 If so, the way you've written your issue is almost incomprehensible and your point is seriously irrelevant to the requests made by the project creators.

Gorbzel 11y ago
I'll admit that it was later in the evening and has been a long week, and also that the line between being opinionated and being an opinionated jerk is sometimes thinner than it may initially seem. However, while it's not the normal type of (technical, to the point) issue that one sees on a github project in that it deals with questions of values, intentions, and whether all product companies that FOSS projects use have an obligation to maintain similar values as those projects, it's not irrelevant. It's absolutely central to why Github hasn't responded thus far and whether they'll even pay attention to this (and arguably if they should). But if we're lobbing attacks at one another, you don't even try to explain why it's "seriously" irrelevant. Also, the visible response I've gotten thus far from people claiming to be involved with this project has been nothing short of circlejerk. No measured consideration of what actions are being taken, no attempting to understand other people's viewpoints, nothing. Yet when I try to determine who's who and what's what, apparently that's irrelevant, even think it's always people claiming to be "involved" with dear-github who bring it up in the first place.

joshmanders 11y ago

> a big part of that may be questions of who exactly is "involved" with the letter. Being someone who's helping with the `dear-github` repo, why does WHO is behind the repo matter? Does it change the reflections of the community who've come out to support it and sign it?

Gorbzel 11y ago
We agree, I don't think it matters. I initially believed based on the "petition" nature of the letter and adding signatories that it was going to be an inclusive effort. Which is why I've asked and received absolutely no answer as to why one of the dear-github organizational "owners" (as labeled on Github) responses to my issue inquiry was to tell me who he was, then use that to determine my issue was not constructive.
- carussell 11y ago
  > one of the dear-github organizational "owners" (as labeled on Github) responses to my issue inquiry was to tell me who he was, then use that to determine my issue was not constructive. Based on the issue linked above, it doesn't look like this is what happened. Although it may have happened through some other channel. What it looks like happened is that neither one of you were able to understand what the other's point was.