8 ms·

I don't know if it's just me, but if you read the forums and bug reports related to open source projects, it feels like programmers today are a really entitled

I don't know if it's just me, but if you read the forums and bug reports related to open source projects, it feels like programmers today are a really entitled lot. The tone that people take when filing bug reports for what is basically free software is reprehensible. People are doing work for FREE to benefit you, and you take a tone with them like you are a prince and they are your royal goblet holders? Who taught these human beings their manners? I totally understand the frustration when you write a large system in Python and then the Python committee makes a breaking change that makes your life very difficult. However, you didn't pay for Python! These sorts of changes should be expected, and if you didn't expect it, you are the fool. And in any case, you aren't paying these people a cent, so speak politely to them. You are basically a charity case from their perspective.

newen 8y ago
In the majority of cases, they are getting paid to code it (by some company, organization, etc). And they benefit from the popularity of the the software. So I don't think I need to see myself as a charity case or adopt a please please please attitude with them.
- domoritz 8y ago
  Where do you get "in the majority of cases" from? https://twitter.com/NumFOCUS/status/1017418416725155840 https://twitter.com/NumFOCUS/status/1017418416725155840.
- about_help 8y ago
  Agreed. No need to be a dick, but bug reports are often pretty cut and dry and often some frustration does leak into the tone. Any big project, whether code or some local government thing, will have some level of assholes.
- habosa 8y ago
  I maintain a number of open source projects for Google. So yes I am paid to do it and yes the company benefits from it. That said, it doesn't mean that developers who use it can take an entitled stance and expect to get anywhere. I get so many bug reports like "This sux and you have to fix it!!!!" and even when I wake up on the right side of the bed, there's nothing I can do with those. A calm discussion of what the developer is trying to achieve, what they expect to happen, what actually happens, and how I can reproduce will get a quick response from me 100% of the time.
  - hangonhn 8y ago
    Also, the paid vs. unpaid is a BS argument. Even if you were paid, it's not the complaining user who's paying you so how can they feel entitled to your time? Some people... That said, when someone open sources something there isn an implicit "contract" between the developers and users. The users' feedback helps the developers and in return they get something valuable. It's more of a group effort rather than some one directional flow of power. I've seen projects where these relationships weren't properly managed or where one group didn't appreciate the other and the end result is always the same: dead projects.
  - ychen306 8y ago
    In your case, it only means you owe Google, but not the other user.
- pertymcpert 8y ago
  You are a charity case.
kk__ 8y ago
You are paying for python. You pay for any software product you use by not using an alternative. OSS maintainers deserve respect but at a certain point they have turned their hobby in to their career, complete with clients and marketing. If you are willing to trust an open source project for your livelihood than the maintainer also has an obligation to respect that.
- n_o_u 8y ago
  Sorry, what exactly are you paying them?
- noonespecial 8y ago
  You missed the part of "paying" where there is any benefit at all (or incentive) in the maintainer doing that work for you. Worse, it's open source. You are always free to do it your damn self if it's so important to your livelihood. Rule 1: Nobody owes you jack.
- gregmac 8y ago
  > You pay for any software product you use by not using an alternative. Sure, but in the same sense "you pay" for eating a day-old egg salad sandwich you found sitting on a park bench. (Luckily, even using badly-written open source software generally has a less unpleasant outcome.) Like open source, the chef -- who you have no relationship, connection or contract with -- is not under any obligation to guarantee either your satisfaction or survival. If you want to reduce the risk to your livelihood, you should pay money for both your critical open source software and your egg salad sandwiches.
- ci5er 8y ago
  In a previous life I threw some tarballs w/ a buildable OpenGL clone and separately a buildable Renderman "clone" onto an FTP server and published the location. Some people downloaded it, built it and used it. Even added to it, where they liked. Most people were like you. I never share code any more.
  - justinator 8y ago
chrstphrhrt 8y ago
Not just you. It's a thing. Even more extreme, consider that companies that do charge money drop the ball constantly on security/privacy, and basic quality. And yet they continue growing, maybe having a bit of churn. I think there's something about generosity that just attracts entitled bullies/leeches because they see it as an opportunity to "win" against people who are "foolish" (aka "weak") enough to work for free. Sadly sometimes the generous are duped into considering such requests out of curiosity or politeness, which leads to burnout or worse.
kro39nxkdk 8y ago
Recently saw a friend Tweet about a Python update breaking his heavily personalized Linux env “They lack rigorous testing it seems” with no consideration that he’s running his own distro and toolchain (he’s gotten a big intense about this stuff) I have much less respect for this ridiculously talented engineer, who lacks wisdom
rodorgas 8y ago
It's the same behaviour of ordinary users, in general. A developer who uses your library is, basically, a user. They see your work as an obligation, not as a gift you are giving to everyone.
- Groxx 8y ago
  I was going to say the same thing. Free users are famously bad users in general, and open source stuff is often free too.
HumanDrivenDev 8y ago
I think it's deeper than just 'programmers today'. It's an important life lesson for people pre-disposed towards niceness to learn. Most people aren't thoughtful or considerate or fair. They just want to maximise benefit for themselves and their family. You're pushing a free product - so to them it's 'worthless' and they can treat you like trash. Figure it out sooner rather than later or you'll be walked over for the rest of your life.
makecheck 8y ago
Yep. Sometimes I think it wouldn’t hurt at all to put up a 3-question checklist before an E-mail/contact/post/submit-bug or other link even appears, where the 3 questions basically remind the person to be civil.
draw_down 8y ago
I mean, I don't disagree about the entitlement point, but it's worth remembering this is being discussed in the context of a guy who called himself the "benevolent dictator for life" of the project in question.
acdha 8y ago
This is the number one thing making me lose interest in some projects I maintain. That toxic subset of users who expect free support debugging their applications is terrible for motivation, not least because most of them won’t even apologize when the problem turns out to be something they did.
dcosson 8y ago
I think what you're saying is true in the case of someone just throwing up some code they wrote online without any plan of supporting or developing it further. But once you call it an open-source project, and you have docs and a roadmap and an issues page and stuff, you're making an implicit contract with people who use it that it will do a reasonable job of solving the problem it claims to solve. The user is choosing to use it over other alternatives and investing time learning and integrating it, so it doesn't seem at all unreasonable to me for them to be frustrated when they realize that due to some bug or limitation it doesn't actually solve the problem for them that it claims to. As an analogy, if you give someone free food and it makes them sick, are they justified in getting mad at you? I think most people would say yes. IANAL but I'd imagine that if you got food poisoning from Ben & Jerry's free cone day due to negligent sanitation practices or something, you could probably sue the company just like if you had paid for it. Or, if a member of some sort of volunteer community board is doing a bad job, people will complain about it. An open source maintainer is basically in the same position. Of course, that's no excuse for being rude to them, but you also shouldn't be rude if you paid for something and it doesn't work. I'm not saying we shouldn't do anything to reduce hostility towards maintainers when it happens. But it's not true, in open source software or anywhere else, that just because something is free there are automatically no expectations around it.
- nickthemagicman 8y ago
  I think theres absolutely zero implicit contract that implies that open source software maintainers owe ANYone ANYthing at ANYtime. That's the reason it's open source because everyone can fix it, all an open source maintainer owes you is a P.R. review. Therefore if an open source project maintainer is giving you their time and patience then you better be extra polite and grateful to them. If Ben and Jerrys left a bunch of ice cream on the sidewalk and a bunch of people ate it and got sick then there would be zero liability on Ben and Jerrys.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - skishore 8y ago
hmart 8y ago
This create a case for pay for software believing a guarantee is granted just for paying
riazrizvi 8y ago
I get the point. However I also really enjoy it when a fellow developer makes the time to get their point across in a friendly, compassionate tone. I see that rants tend to be the way we phrase our complaints, perhaps because most of us feel rushed and we kid ourselves we are discussing purely technical matters? I need to keep reminding myself that there is an underlying/social purpose to my work.
Gatsky 8y ago
It is just selection bias. People that start and maintain OSS are on average more helpful and nice than people that don’t, hence the interaction. A similar effect exists in relationships. If you are ‘nice’ then your potential partners include both other nice people and horrible people, because generally a horrible person will not tolerate another horrible person. Hence, you see nice people in relationships with horrible people more often than one would hope.
setgree 8y ago
One person who understands and writes extremely well about this dynamic is Eliezer Yudkowsky. From the incomparable Harry potter and the Methods of Rationality: [0] ""I was going to be a hero, once," said Professor Quirrell, still looking upward. "Can you believe that, Miss Granger?" "No." "Thank you again, Miss Granger. It is true nonetheless... I was not naive, Miss Granger, I did not expect the power-holders to align themselves with me so quickly - not without something in it for themselves. But their power, too, was threatened; and so I was shocked how they seemed content to step back, and leave to that man all burdens of responsibility. They sneered at his performance, remarking among themselves how they would do better in his place, though they did not condescend to step forward...Perhaps, by taking on himself the curse of action, that man removed it from all others?... "So -" Hermione's voice sounded strange in the night. "You left your friends behind where they'd be safe, and tried to attack the Dark Wizard all by yourself?" "Why, no," said Professor Quirrell. "I stopped trying to be a hero, and went off to do something else I found more pleasant."" This might be hard to grok without reading the preceding 83 chapters but it is the first thing that came to mind when I see how people treat open source contributors. [0] http://www.hpmor.com/chapter/84 http://www.hpmor.com/chapter/84
- _1100 8y ago
  I grok. I have neither read this, nor have I read any Harry Potter (much to the chagrin of many of my friends, I'm sorry, I've tried). This sums up a fairly universal behavior that I think we all tend to take part in, and also see others taking part in when we all spot a problem but don't take action because we have the luxury (i.e. removed from any real chance of harm) to watch the problem be solved by anybody else. Then we use this position of luxurious inaction to judge and complain. I'm surprised by the reactions I see here though. I'm not invested in the subject of this post, but I can see the hurt of this person in their post. It also appears that they are not bailing, but simply allowing others to try and do better, with suggestions to boot. And here we sit, justifying our luxurious anger at a person so exhausted from doing free work that they have to walk away from what I assume is a passion of theirs.
  - setgree 8y ago
evantahler 8y ago
https://github.com/evantahler/Dont-be-a-Jerk https://github.com/evantahler/Dont-be-a-Jerk: The open source license for reasonable free software
- DennisP 8y ago
  I like it but I think its terms are contradictory. - "You don't have to do X but if you don't do X you're being a jerk." - "Don't be a jerk." If I don't do X, have I violated the license terms or not?
AlexCoventry 8y ago
Maybe I'm just getting older, but it seems as though online behavior is getting more hostile generally.
jghn 8y ago
I lead an open source effort which is fairly large in a relatively niche field. While most users are awesome, it never ceases to amaze me how rude some people can be. Because something isn't exactly the way they want it we're the worst, dumbest people in the world. Hey I'm happy to refund the money you spend purchasing my product.
quickthrower2 8y ago
It could be because the assumption that because python is famous, it must have some funding/money/company behind it.

newen 8y ago

In the majority of cases, they are getting paid to code it (by some company, organization, etc). And they benefit from the popularity of the the software. So I don't think I need to see myself as a charity case or adopt a please please please attitude with them.

domoritz 8y ago
Where do you get "in the majority of cases" from? https://twitter.com/NumFOCUS/status/1017418416725155840 https://twitter.com/NumFOCUS/status/1017418416725155840.
about_help 8y ago
Agreed. No need to be a dick, but bug reports are often pretty cut and dry and often some frustration does leak into the tone. Any big project, whether code or some local government thing, will have some level of assholes.
habosa 8y ago
I maintain a number of open source projects for Google. So yes I am paid to do it and yes the company benefits from it. That said, it doesn't mean that developers who use it can take an entitled stance and expect to get anywhere. I get so many bug reports like "This sux and you have to fix it!!!!" and even when I wake up on the right side of the bed, there's nothing I can do with those. A calm discussion of what the developer is trying to achieve, what they expect to happen, what actually happens, and how I can reproduce will get a quick response from me 100% of the time.
- hangonhn 8y ago
  Also, the paid vs. unpaid is a BS argument. Even if you were paid, it's not the complaining user who's paying you so how can they feel entitled to your time? Some people... That said, when someone open sources something there isn an implicit "contract" between the developers and users. The users' feedback helps the developers and in return they get something valuable. It's more of a group effort rather than some one directional flow of power. I've seen projects where these relationships weren't properly managed or where one group didn't appreciate the other and the end result is always the same: dead projects.
- ychen306 8y ago
  In your case, it only means you owe Google, but not the other user.
pertymcpert 8y ago
You are a charity case.

kk__ 8y ago

You are paying for python. You pay for any software product you use by not using an alternative. OSS maintainers deserve respect but at a certain point they have turned their hobby in to their career, complete with clients and marketing. If you are willing to trust an open source project for your livelihood than the maintainer also has an obligation to respect that.

n_o_u 8y ago
Sorry, what exactly are you paying them?
noonespecial 8y ago
You missed the part of "paying" where there is any benefit at all (or incentive) in the maintainer doing that work for you. Worse, it's open source. You are always free to do it your damn self if it's so important to your livelihood. Rule 1: Nobody owes you jack.
gregmac 8y ago
> You pay for any software product you use by not using an alternative. Sure, but in the same sense "you pay" for eating a day-old egg salad sandwich you found sitting on a park bench. (Luckily, even using badly-written open source software generally has a less unpleasant outcome.) Like open source, the chef -- who you have no relationship, connection or contract with -- is not under any obligation to guarantee either your satisfaction or survival. If you want to reduce the risk to your livelihood, you should pay money for both your critical open source software and your egg salad sandwiches.
ci5er 8y ago
In a previous life I threw some tarballs w/ a buildable OpenGL clone and separately a buildable Renderman "clone" onto an FTP server and published the location. Some people downloaded it, built it and used it. Even added to it, where they liked. Most people were like you. I never share code any more.
- justinator 8y ago

chrstphrhrt 8y ago

Not just you. It's a thing. Even more extreme, consider that companies that do charge money drop the ball constantly on security/privacy, and basic quality. And yet they continue growing, maybe having a bit of churn. I think there's something about generosity that just attracts entitled bullies/leeches because they see it as an opportunity to "win" against people who are "foolish" (aka "weak") enough to work for free. Sadly sometimes the generous are duped into considering such requests out of curiosity or politeness, which leads to burnout or worse.

kro39nxkdk 8y ago

Recently saw a friend Tweet about a Python update breaking his heavily personalized Linux env “They lack rigorous testing it seems” with no consideration that he’s running his own distro and toolchain (he’s gotten a big intense about this stuff) I have much less respect for this ridiculously talented engineer, who lacks wisdom

rodorgas 8y ago

It's the same behaviour of ordinary users, in general. A developer who uses your library is, basically, a user. They see your work as an obligation, not as a gift you are giving to everyone.

Groxx 8y ago
I was going to say the same thing. Free users are famously bad users in general, and open source stuff is often free too.

HumanDrivenDev 8y ago

I think it's deeper than just 'programmers today'. It's an important life lesson for people pre-disposed towards niceness to learn. Most people aren't thoughtful or considerate or fair. They just want to maximise benefit for themselves and their family. You're pushing a free product - so to them it's 'worthless' and they can treat you like trash. Figure it out sooner rather than later or you'll be walked over for the rest of your life.

makecheck 8y ago

Yep. Sometimes I think it wouldn’t hurt at all to put up a 3-question checklist before an E-mail/contact/post/submit-bug or other link even appears, where the 3 questions basically remind the person to be civil.

draw_down 8y ago

I mean, I don't disagree about the entitlement point, but it's worth remembering this is being discussed in the context of a guy who called himself the "benevolent dictator for life" of the project in question.

acdha 8y ago

This is the number one thing making me lose interest in some projects I maintain. That toxic subset of users who expect free support debugging their applications is terrible for motivation, not least because most of them won’t even apologize when the problem turns out to be something they did.

dcosson 8y ago

I think what you're saying is true in the case of someone just throwing up some code they wrote online without any plan of supporting or developing it further. But once you call it an open-source project, and you have docs and a roadmap and an issues page and stuff, you're making an implicit contract with people who use it that it will do a reasonable job of solving the problem it claims to solve. The user is choosing to use it over other alternatives and investing time learning and integrating it, so it doesn't seem at all unreasonable to me for them to be frustrated when they realize that due to some bug or limitation it doesn't actually solve the problem for them that it claims to. As an analogy, if you give someone free food and it makes them sick, are they justified in getting mad at you? I think most people would say yes. IANAL but I'd imagine that if you got food poisoning from Ben & Jerry's free cone day due to negligent sanitation practices or something, you could probably sue the company just like if you had paid for it. Or, if a member of some sort of volunteer community board is doing a bad job, people will complain about it. An open source maintainer is basically in the same position. Of course, that's no excuse for being rude to them, but you also shouldn't be rude if you paid for something and it doesn't work. I'm not saying we shouldn't do anything to reduce hostility towards maintainers when it happens. But it's not true, in open source software or anywhere else, that just because something is free there are automatically no expectations around it.

nickthemagicman 8y ago
I think theres absolutely zero implicit contract that implies that open source software maintainers owe ANYone ANYthing at ANYtime. That's the reason it's open source because everyone can fix it, all an open source maintainer owes you is a P.R. review. Therefore if an open source project maintainer is giving you their time and patience then you better be extra polite and grateful to them. If Ben and Jerrys left a bunch of ice cream on the sidewalk and a bunch of people ate it and got sick then there would be zero liability on Ben and Jerrys.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- skishore 8y ago

hmart 8y ago

This create a case for pay for software believing a guarantee is granted just for paying

riazrizvi 8y ago

I get the point. However I also really enjoy it when a fellow developer makes the time to get their point across in a friendly, compassionate tone. I see that rants tend to be the way we phrase our complaints, perhaps because most of us feel rushed and we kid ourselves we are discussing purely technical matters? I need to keep reminding myself that there is an underlying/social purpose to my work.

Gatsky 8y ago

It is just selection bias. People that start and maintain OSS are on average more helpful and nice than people that don’t, hence the interaction. A similar effect exists in relationships. If you are ‘nice’ then your potential partners include both other nice people and horrible people, because generally a horrible person will not tolerate another horrible person. Hence, you see nice people in relationships with horrible people more often than one would hope.

setgree 8y ago

One person who understands and writes extremely well about this dynamic is Eliezer Yudkowsky. From the incomparable Harry potter and the Methods of Rationality: [0] ""I was going to be a hero, once," said Professor Quirrell, still looking upward. "Can you believe that, Miss Granger?" "No." "Thank you again, Miss Granger. It is true nonetheless... I was not naive, Miss Granger, I did not expect the power-holders to align themselves with me so quickly - not without something in it for themselves. But their power, too, was threatened; and so I was shocked how they seemed content to step back, and leave to that man all burdens of responsibility. They sneered at his performance, remarking among themselves how they would do better in his place, though they did not condescend to step forward...Perhaps, by taking on himself the curse of action, that man removed it from all others?... "So -" Hermione's voice sounded strange in the night. "You left your friends behind where they'd be safe, and tried to attack the Dark Wizard all by yourself?" "Why, no," said Professor Quirrell. "I stopped trying to be a hero, and went off to do something else I found more pleasant."" This might be hard to grok without reading the preceding 83 chapters but it is the first thing that came to mind when I see how people treat open source contributors. [0] http://www.hpmor.com/chapter/84 http://www.hpmor.com/chapter/84

_1100 8y ago
I grok. I have neither read this, nor have I read any Harry Potter (much to the chagrin of many of my friends, I'm sorry, I've tried). This sums up a fairly universal behavior that I think we all tend to take part in, and also see others taking part in when we all spot a problem but don't take action because we have the luxury (i.e. removed from any real chance of harm) to watch the problem be solved by anybody else. Then we use this position of luxurious inaction to judge and complain. I'm surprised by the reactions I see here though. I'm not invested in the subject of this post, but I can see the hurt of this person in their post. It also appears that they are not bailing, but simply allowing others to try and do better, with suggestions to boot. And here we sit, justifying our luxurious anger at a person so exhausted from doing free work that they have to walk away from what I assume is a passion of theirs.
- setgree 8y ago

evantahler 8y ago

https://github.com/evantahler/Dont-be-a-Jerk https://github.com/evantahler/Dont-be-a-Jerk: The open source license for reasonable free software

DennisP 8y ago
I like it but I think its terms are contradictory. - "You don't have to do X but if you don't do X you're being a jerk." - "Don't be a jerk." If I don't do X, have I violated the license terms or not?

AlexCoventry 8y ago

Maybe I'm just getting older, but it seems as though online behavior is getting more hostile generally.

jghn 8y ago

I lead an open source effort which is fairly large in a relatively niche field. While most users are awesome, it never ceases to amaze me how rude some people can be. Because something isn't exactly the way they want it we're the worst, dumbest people in the world. Hey I'm happy to refund the money you spend purchasing my product.

quickthrower2 8y ago

It could be because the assumption that because python is famous, it must have some funding/money/company behind it.