4 ms·

Thanks for calling this out. This is not something I would have thought to check myself. It's unfortunate the most common use of the word toxic is in a very abs

Thanks for calling this out. This is not something I would have thought to check myself. It's unfortunate the most common use of the word toxic is in a very abstract sense, but the behavior you identify is just plain unnecessary rudeness and a much more suitable use of the word. Can we assume people are acting in good faith until we have reason to think otherwise? As highlighted by the green-is-yellow issue, it is OK to simply say, "Understood. The color scheme has been previously discussed, is popular and isn't currently considered for change. But you can configure it yourself by <link-to-documentation>..." The accusation of an entitled attitude appears a bit of a leap to me too. To be fair, while a tad rude in tone, the dev's second post is an improvement. Or perhaps, "We don't have a lot of resources for this level of detail. Sorry." (Open-source honesty?) Or even, "If you wrote a patch taking the values from rxvt it would be considered but possibly rejected after discussing policy with lead devs."

est31 5y ago
> But you can configure it yourself by <link-to-documentation>... The two first comments of the maintainer in the thread mentioned the configurability of alacritty, giving soft hints that maybe the user should just set it privately to comfort their private taste. I feel that discussions about taste choices can sometimes be the most tiring ones, because often people have different tastes and you can't give rational arguments why you like one taste more. That's why there is configurability in the first place, maintainers recognizing that people have a diversity of personal tastes. You can't ever do it right by everyone. Maybe the maintainer should have communicated that better more early on, but they did communicate something along those lines later on. They were still around to explain themselves.
- KwisatzHaderack 5y ago
  In this case, it’s not even taste preference but color perception, which is even harder to objectify.
beaunative 5y ago
TBH, I detect grumpiness from his initial comment. He might not be a bad person, but if it's in an office, I'd probably apologize first if it was me who said that.

est31 5y ago

> But you can configure it yourself by <link-to-documentation>... The two first comments of the maintainer in the thread mentioned the configurability of alacritty, giving soft hints that maybe the user should just set it privately to comfort their private taste. I feel that discussions about taste choices can sometimes be the most tiring ones, because often people have different tastes and you can't give rational arguments why you like one taste more. That's why there is configurability in the first place, maintainers recognizing that people have a diversity of personal tastes. You can't ever do it right by everyone. Maybe the maintainer should have communicated that better more early on, but they did communicate something along those lines later on. They were still around to explain themselves.

KwisatzHaderack 5y ago
In this case, it’s not even taste preference but color perception, which is even harder to objectify.

beaunative 5y ago

TBH, I detect grumpiness from his initial comment. He might not be a bad person, but if it's in an office, I'd probably apologize first if it was me who said that.