4 ms·
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your comment, but it sounds (to me) like you're putting the onus on the maintainers, as if it's their obligation to contribute to OS
by andersource 4y ago
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your comment, but it sounds (to me) like you're putting the onus on the maintainers, as if it's their obligation to contribute to OS and their inability to not be upset stands in the way of performing their obligation. Many OS maintainers derive joy (and motivation) from knowing that their work is useful and beneficial to others. Users acting entitled isn't "upsetting" in the same sense as a rude stranger is upsetting - it makes the maintainers feel unappreciated and nullifies their source of joy from working on OS.
I agree that everyone would always benefit from being more emotionally resilient because there will always be negative behavior around us, but strongly disagree that nothing should / can be done from OS users' perspective.
- djoldman 4y agoI mean that maintainers (and users) have zero obligation to maintain or contribute to anything in almost all cases. If a user is "toxic" or otherwise isn't contributing something of value to the project, then maintainers need to learn how to deal with it emotionally or otherwise. As the article says: "Just say no" is a good place to start.
- Bakary 4y agoThe first step is to acknowledge that just because a comment or message exists, doesn't mean you have to consider or respond to it. Bob is just one user amongst many, but the fact that he manifested himself through an issue means that he took over disproportionate mental space compared to the mass of silent users.