4 ms·

> No. I'm very clear with demands on my time That's great for you, and the other commenter who said the same. I'm pleased you feel comfortable enough with that

> No. I'm very clear with demands on my time That's great for you, and the other commenter who said the same. I'm pleased you feel comfortable enough with that. Would I be right in thinking that you have spent a significant amount of time being a full-time contractor? Either way, I'll wager that makes you the 1%, not the typical. The typical developer works a full-time job and does a little project on the side. Their boss may or may not know about it, and if they do, they are happy so long as work on the project does not impact their full-time job responsibilities. But this presumption of "I feel comfortable with X and therefore nobody else needs help with this" is terribly damaging, and the fact that these over-confident voices shout about how weak and inexperienced and dumb everyone else is for falling into that trap, only serves to cement the impostor syndrome and erode self worth. People usually cannot be shamed into becoming more confident and assertive. People need to be supported into becoming more confident and assertive. And a project that helps people feel supported cannot be a bad thing imo. >> tech giants accrued fortunes on the backs of people they’ve never thanked, paid or even met. > I don't like the accusations of unfairness being levied against open source users (among which I would also include myself) There's the problem. Unless you happen to be a tech giant, you are not the entity this project is trying to shame.

kelnos 5y ago
At this point I'm not really sure why you continue arguing this. I don't think anyone is claiming that the common case is the developer who stands up for themselves, has healthy boundaries, and doesn't let internet-hate scare them. Most developers fall into this trap, including a past version of myself. But I think it's a pretty objective fact that this isn't a good way to be. I'd be hard-pressed to find someone that would say that it's awesome to be a doormat who allows others to walk all over them. But with work (possibly with the help of someone like a therapist or professional coach), people can change their attitude in order to have a healthier relationship with their OSS projects, and can develop the assertiveness necessary to enforce their boundaries. If you (not you "you", just the general "you") don't want to put in that work, that's ok I guess, but then maybe you should just accept that you're always going to have a toxic relationship with your OSS projects and with some of your users. Just to be clear, from your statement: > But this presumption of "I feel comfortable with X and therefore nobody else needs help with this" I'm having trouble finding where anyone said this (and if that's what you're reading, maybe you should step back and think about why that is). I see people saying that they're able to set healthy boundaries, presumably as inspiration to others. "If I can do it, don't despair: this is something you can learn too, and it will improve your life." We need not accept that the status quo is the only option, especially when it's a fairly bad option. I don't know if Tea will be good or useful or will solve any problems, but I do note that it (at least in part) seems like a technological solution to a social problem, and those tend to not work out so well. Or they do work, but serve as a crutch to allow people to avoid confronting uncomfortable truths about themselves.
- undecisive 5y ago
  >> But this presumption of "I feel comfortable with X and therefore nobody else needs help with this" > I'm having trouble finding where anyone said this I'm indicating the general tone. I'll be more careful not to misuse quote marks in this comment and use [] to denote paraphrases! When I itemise the traps people can fall into, and then get the response of "No. I'm very clear with demands on my time" it ignores the vast swathes of people that don't have this luxury. Now maybe this commenter just felt I was talking about them directly; I did, after all, phrase the though process in the third person. (Now YOU have a choice, do YOU continue donating... etc) But given this is a comment in the public domain, this seems unlikely. More likely is that the commenter is dismissing the problem, because it doesn't apply to them. In general, I think we're mostly on the same page here: > I don't think anyone is claiming that the common case is the developer who stands up for themselves, has healthy boundaries, and doesn't let internet-hate scare them. Most developers fall into this trap, including a past version of myself. Exactly. Me too. The problem is, having addressed it to some extent, some people choose to believe that it's no longer a problem. Often it manifests as kind of a "I fixed myself, so why haven't you?" mentality. > people can change their attitude in order to have a healthier relationship with their OSS projects, and can develop the assertiveness necessary to enforce their boundaries Putting the idea of access to therapy aside, you and I can agree that it is absolutely beneficial for people to work on this aspect of themselves, as a general rule. However, while it is right to say [This is not a healthy stance to take] but we should be careful not to imply [It's your fault you are being weak] or that the recipient is the problem, not the toxic individuals. And while that isn't overtly being said in these comments, that's still the implication I take from them, even trying to re-read it charitably.

kelnos 5y ago

At this point I'm not really sure why you continue arguing this. I don't think anyone is claiming that the common case is the developer who stands up for themselves, has healthy boundaries, and doesn't let internet-hate scare them. Most developers fall into this trap, including a past version of myself. But I think it's a pretty objective fact that this isn't a good way to be. I'd be hard-pressed to find someone that would say that it's awesome to be a doormat who allows others to walk all over them. But with work (possibly with the help of someone like a therapist or professional coach), people can change their attitude in order to have a healthier relationship with their OSS projects, and can develop the assertiveness necessary to enforce their boundaries. If you (not you "you", just the general "you") don't want to put in that work, that's ok I guess, but then maybe you should just accept that you're always going to have a toxic relationship with your OSS projects and with some of your users. Just to be clear, from your statement: > But this presumption of "I feel comfortable with X and therefore nobody else needs help with this" I'm having trouble finding where anyone said this (and if that's what you're reading, maybe you should step back and think about why that is). I see people saying that they're able to set healthy boundaries, presumably as inspiration to others. "If I can do it, don't despair: this is something you can learn too, and it will improve your life." We need not accept that the status quo is the only option, especially when it's a fairly bad option. I don't know if Tea will be good or useful or will solve any problems, but I do note that it (at least in part) seems like a technological solution to a social problem, and those tend to not work out so well. Or they do work, but serve as a crutch to allow people to avoid confronting uncomfortable truths about themselves.

undecisive 5y ago
>> But this presumption of "I feel comfortable with X and therefore nobody else needs help with this" > I'm having trouble finding where anyone said this I'm indicating the general tone. I'll be more careful not to misuse quote marks in this comment and use [] to denote paraphrases! When I itemise the traps people can fall into, and then get the response of "No. I'm very clear with demands on my time" it ignores the vast swathes of people that don't have this luxury. Now maybe this commenter just felt I was talking about them directly; I did, after all, phrase the though process in the third person. (Now YOU have a choice, do YOU continue donating... etc) But given this is a comment in the public domain, this seems unlikely. More likely is that the commenter is dismissing the problem, because it doesn't apply to them. In general, I think we're mostly on the same page here: > I don't think anyone is claiming that the common case is the developer who stands up for themselves, has healthy boundaries, and doesn't let internet-hate scare them. Most developers fall into this trap, including a past version of myself. Exactly. Me too. The problem is, having addressed it to some extent, some people choose to believe that it's no longer a problem. Often it manifests as kind of a "I fixed myself, so why haven't you?" mentality. > people can change their attitude in order to have a healthier relationship with their OSS projects, and can develop the assertiveness necessary to enforce their boundaries Putting the idea of access to therapy aside, you and I can agree that it is absolutely beneficial for people to work on this aspect of themselves, as a general rule. However, while it is right to say [This is not a healthy stance to take] but we should be careful not to imply [It's your fault you are being weak] or that the recipient is the problem, not the toxic individuals. And while that isn't overtly being said in these comments, that's still the implication I take from them, even trying to re-read it charitably.