3 ms·

> 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

> 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.

3 ms·

> 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

by wtallis 6y ago

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.