4 ms·

Are you talking about the comment that closed the ticket [1]? Are we not seeing the same thing, because that's not a "top draw dick" I'm seeing. He was perfect

Are you talking about the comment that closed the ticket [1]? Are we not seeing the same thing, because that's not a "top draw dick" I'm seeing. He was perfectly reasonable. And I don't know if you've ever managed any popular open source projects, however it's best to close tickets fast instead of letting them linger on, especially when you have over 1000 opened issues and especially if, as a maintainer, you know that you won't change your mind about that issue. Then he got accused of being funded by Google. He actually showed restraint. [1] https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/12499#issuecomment-490057558 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/12499#issuecomment...

wtallis 6y ago
> Are we not seeing the same thing, because that's not a "top draw dick" I'm seeing. > He was perfectly reasonable. The original complaint had the form "this default should be changed for reason X". Poettering's response was "our defaults are Y, and you can change them". That's not perfectly reasonable. It's a non sequitur. Poettering's response passively-aggressively ignores what the original complaint was all about, instead of simply issuing a direct rejection.
- bad_user 6y ago
  It isn't a non-sequitur, he offered a solution for users that would like different settings, while choosing not to engage in pointless arguments. While professional courtesy is recommended, maintainers don't really owe an explanation for their work when provided for free. Put that man on a payroll and you might deserve a more detailed answer.
  - wtallis 6y ago
    It is absolutely a non-sequitur to tell someone what the defaults are when they are complaining that they do not like what the defaults are. "Choosing not to engage in pointless arguments" would be not responding at all, rather than responding in a manner that is implicitly insulting. Poettering phrased his response as if he was answering a different issue than the one he was actually responding to. Deliberately misinterpreting someone's question instead of directly saying he didn't want to get into that matter is poor behavior.
    - growse 6y ago
      If they don't like the defaults, they could just fork the project.
  - KaiserPro 6y ago
    Its more basic than that. He chose not to give a _detailed_ answer, and diverted from the original point. Thats perfectly fine then to go off on one here: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/12499#issuecomment-642645878 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/12499#issuecomment... its just being a dick. Its not even entertaining.
KaiserPro 6y ago
yes, and he would have been able to close it again, instead he wrote this: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/12499#issuecomment-642645878 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/12499#issuecomment...
- bad_user 6y ago
  After being insulted with that comment on Google finding? As I said, he showed restraint.
  - laumars 6y ago
    It’s sad times when “showing restraint” means insulting an entire community because one person asked a stupid question first.
    - cycloptic 6y ago
      He probably should have worded it better but the comment does not refer to the entire community. Unfortunately there absolutely is a collection of anti-systemd trolls within the community that have been egging him on for quite some time now and will gladly dog-pile on these github issues with insults and conspiracy theories. I honestly did not even know who he was before I saw lots of this type of toxic and hateful post being directed at him on reddit.

wtallis 6y ago

> Are we not seeing the same thing, because that's not a "top draw dick" I'm seeing. > He was perfectly reasonable. The original complaint had the form "this default should be changed for reason X". Poettering's response was "our defaults are Y, and you can change them". That's not perfectly reasonable. It's a non sequitur. Poettering's response passively-aggressively ignores what the original complaint was all about, instead of simply issuing a direct rejection.

bad_user 6y ago
It isn't a non-sequitur, he offered a solution for users that would like different settings, while choosing not to engage in pointless arguments. While professional courtesy is recommended, maintainers don't really owe an explanation for their work when provided for free. Put that man on a payroll and you might deserve a more detailed answer.
- wtallis 6y ago
  It is absolutely a non-sequitur to tell someone what the defaults are when they are complaining that they do not like what the defaults are. "Choosing not to engage in pointless arguments" would be not responding at all, rather than responding in a manner that is implicitly insulting. Poettering phrased his response as if he was answering a different issue than the one he was actually responding to. Deliberately misinterpreting someone's question instead of directly saying he didn't want to get into that matter is poor behavior.
  - growse 6y ago
    If they don't like the defaults, they could just fork the project.
- KaiserPro 6y ago
  Its more basic than that. He chose not to give a _detailed_ answer, and diverted from the original point. Thats perfectly fine then to go off on one here: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/12499#issuecomment-642645878 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/12499#issuecomment... its just being a dick. Its not even entertaining.

KaiserPro 6y ago

yes, and he would have been able to close it again, instead he wrote this: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/12499#issuecomment-642645878 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/12499#issuecomment...

bad_user 6y ago
After being insulted with that comment on Google finding? As I said, he showed restraint.
- laumars 6y ago
  It’s sad times when “showing restraint” means insulting an entire community because one person asked a stupid question first.
  - cycloptic 6y ago
    He probably should have worded it better but the comment does not refer to the entire community. Unfortunately there absolutely is a collection of anti-systemd trolls within the community that have been egging him on for quite some time now and will gladly dog-pile on these github issues with insults and conspiracy theories. I honestly did not even know who he was before I saw lots of this type of toxic and hateful post being directed at him on reddit.