3 ms·

>That negativity has been for the most part earned. No, it hasn't. It's unacceptable for you to make personal attacks calling them "shitty people" because they

>That negativity has been for the most part earned. No, it hasn't. It's unacceptable for you to make personal attacks calling them "shitty people" because they closed a bug report. It's unacceptable for you to demand that open source developers spend their time addressing your concerns for free. Period. End of story. This isn't up for debate and you're acting like a troll by constantly coming back on this. So I'm asking as person, can you just stop this behavior, please. If you can't agree this is unacceptable, you'll always be a toxic participant in open source. I'm not even exaggerating here. Open source developers will never owe you anything, the entire point of it is it's all voluntary and any contributor can come and go at any time they please. Read this article if you want to know more about why this type of toxic entitlement is always harmful: https://mikemcquaid.com/entitlement-in-open-source/ https://mikemcquaid.com/entitlement-in-open-source/ >You may disagree on that criticism, but from where I'm sitting it was legitimate. And I'm telling you it's not. You're sitting in a place with incorrect information. >Things like "I would be happy if they stop opposing server side decorations in Wayland" is entirely appropriate First of all, that's not what you said originally. You're walking it back again. I wish you would just be honest and apologize and say you were out of line before. Second of all, they're not doing that. Your statement is incorrect and misleading. GNOME isn't opposed to anyone else implementing server side decorations in Wayland. There's just no point to them implementing it in GNOME. >That's about the most passive and polite way to criticize Gnome I can imagine Well you need to imagine harder because that wasn't passive. You're framing it like GNOME is actively standing in the way blocking someone from implementing server side decorations, when they've never done that. You can put server side decorations in your own Wayland implementation, or use another one like KDE that already has it. GNOME can't "oppose" anyone from doing that. >I do that mostly because I don't want to call out individual contributors by name You already did call them out by name. Again, if you have a disagreement with an individual contributor, you should talk it out with them instead of trash talking them behind their back on social media. Trash talking makes your behavior frustrating to deal with because nobody can trust you not to start fights. >Gnome doesn't want to implement XDG-decoration, which is fine, but don't pretend the opposition is going against the facts here. There's no "opposition," this isn't a fight or a debate and it never was. Open source is a team sport and the other team you play against is the computer. It's not about people vs other people. Either you're helping out the team working on the code or you're not. You're still framing this in needlessly confrontational and combative terms, this needs to stop. >When we debate "should gnome implement the XDG-decoration spec" we're actually debating a lot of more ephemeral subjective stuff No, there's no debate to be had here. If you were serious about discussing these issues you'd take it up with the GNOME design team. In a sense their decisions are subjective but they don't just make them at random. They're trying to make a consistent system within a particular framework targeted at a particular set of users. And the same things about development apply to them too. Nobody on the design team gets to "win" every debate. Some ideas are just bad and they lose and get thrown out. All the things you're saying have been discussed to death already. Do you think the design team hasn't heard this already in the years previously when these were brought up before? They have, you're not making any new arguments that would ever be convincing. You're just saying "I wish they would implement this" and that's like, ok? All the GNOME designers have about 1000 features they want to implement too, but time is limited so realistically they can only pick a few and they have to throw out the rest.

traverseda 4y ago
> It's unacceptable for you to demand that open source developers spend their time addressing your concerns for free. Period. Do you understand the difference between that and general criticism of a project? If you had to write guidelines on criticizing a project like Gnome in an acceptable way, what would they be? My suspicion is that you think any criticism is unacceptable, but if you have some actual guidelines other than "people are mean to Gnome" I would be interested in hearing them. Personally I think you've been very disrespectful during this thread, but as I generally enjoy debate I've been willing to put up with it until now.
- QUrprUd1nCeicw 4y ago
  I think I've already explained multiple times what good criticism is. I'll repeat it with some other tips. Always present criticism in a helpful way. Be as respectful as possible every time. Only give feedback that you yourself would be willing to hear from someone else. Make sure the other person is comfortable with you before offering criticism. Never offer criticism unless you're also willing to offer to help. Acknowledge that sometimes your criticism could be wrong and apologize when it is. Accept that sometimes you have no useful criticism to give and in those cases, the best course of action is to stay quiet. Present new information each time instead of repeating old information. Use the "feedback sandwich" and always pair your criticisms with equal or higher amounts of praise. Avoid criticizing in areas that you're not qualified in. For code, that means don't talk about it unless you've personally studied that code in detail. Avoid personal attacks. Avoid trash talking. Avoid starting fights. Avoid continuing old fights. Avoid holding grudges. Avoid rumors and hearsay. Avoid "ranking" people against each other. Never look at anything in terms of "opposing sides." Avoid creating situations where one person wins and the other loses. Remember that everyone is on the same team and as a good community member, the ultimate goal of your criticism is to support others and create situations where everyone can win. This is fairly generic advice and it all isn't even related to GNOME. This is a general guideline for any healthy community. You can read about all this in random books about community building. If you want to be part of open source you just have to be a good community member, there's literally nothing else to open source. That's why I say it's unacceptable to do those negative things. There just isn't any other way this works. These are communities of equals, you aren't the boss and no one else is your boss either, so it's on you to manage your own conduct. I'm trying to be kind to you but you're making it difficult when you lead by saying nasty things about people I know, like they're acting shitty just because they declined to implement a feature that you were personally invested in and they weren't. And you keep insisting that they have to do this or they deserve it or something like that. Please just don't do that, it makes it extremely hard to engage with you when I have to keep going through this wall of "but don't you see this other person sucks" or that type of thing. You're automatically putting everyone else on defense when you do that and it messes up the whole conversation.

traverseda 4y ago

> It's unacceptable for you to demand that open source developers spend their time addressing your concerns for free. Period. Do you understand the difference between that and general criticism of a project? If you had to write guidelines on criticizing a project like Gnome in an acceptable way, what would they be? My suspicion is that you think any criticism is unacceptable, but if you have some actual guidelines other than "people are mean to Gnome" I would be interested in hearing them. Personally I think you've been very disrespectful during this thread, but as I generally enjoy debate I've been willing to put up with it until now.

QUrprUd1nCeicw 4y ago
I think I've already explained multiple times what good criticism is. I'll repeat it with some other tips. Always present criticism in a helpful way. Be as respectful as possible every time. Only give feedback that you yourself would be willing to hear from someone else. Make sure the other person is comfortable with you before offering criticism. Never offer criticism unless you're also willing to offer to help. Acknowledge that sometimes your criticism could be wrong and apologize when it is. Accept that sometimes you have no useful criticism to give and in those cases, the best course of action is to stay quiet. Present new information each time instead of repeating old information. Use the "feedback sandwich" and always pair your criticisms with equal or higher amounts of praise. Avoid criticizing in areas that you're not qualified in. For code, that means don't talk about it unless you've personally studied that code in detail. Avoid personal attacks. Avoid trash talking. Avoid starting fights. Avoid continuing old fights. Avoid holding grudges. Avoid rumors and hearsay. Avoid "ranking" people against each other. Never look at anything in terms of "opposing sides." Avoid creating situations where one person wins and the other loses. Remember that everyone is on the same team and as a good community member, the ultimate goal of your criticism is to support others and create situations where everyone can win. This is fairly generic advice and it all isn't even related to GNOME. This is a general guideline for any healthy community. You can read about all this in random books about community building. If you want to be part of open source you just have to be a good community member, there's literally nothing else to open source. That's why I say it's unacceptable to do those negative things. There just isn't any other way this works. These are communities of equals, you aren't the boss and no one else is your boss either, so it's on you to manage your own conduct. I'm trying to be kind to you but you're making it difficult when you lead by saying nasty things about people I know, like they're acting shitty just because they declined to implement a feature that you were personally invested in and they weren't. And you keep insisting that they have to do this or they deserve it or something like that. Please just don't do that, it makes it extremely hard to engage with you when I have to keep going through this wall of "but don't you see this other person sucks" or that type of thing. You're automatically putting everyone else on defense when you do that and it messes up the whole conversation.