4 ms·

Then why bring up IRC’s lack of a “pleasant” app? Just seems like a problem you can and should solve for yourself, but is otherwise wholly unrelated to the pro

by Zetice 3y ago

Then why bring up IRC’s lack of a “pleasant” app? Just seems like a problem you can and should solve for yourself, but is otherwise wholly unrelated to the protocol. One doesn’t complain about http because the mobile browser options aren’t to one’s liking.

boredtofears 3y ago
You don't have to take responsibility for fixing something just because you criticized it. Fixating on the term used is a tad disingenuous. I think most people reading hacker news understands that the IRC ecosystem is being referenced here - not the protocol itself. IRC has been around 30+ years and it still doesn't have any great clients. If you wanted to build a featureful chat client IRC wouldn't even be a good choice because there is so many things missing from the spec.
- Zetice 3y ago
  Sorry but this passive voice over a completely open system is intolerable. Fix it yourself. It annoys me.
  - eropple 3y ago
    Let's put it as simply as possible, because there's the genuine possibility that you don't understand, rather than are just being an acrimonious troll. You wouldn't be Linux-on-the-desktopping as hard as you are if you didn't want people to use it. As such, if you, as an advocate of a thing, want other people to use it when the alternative is "continue using other things", then the least effective response is "fix it yourself". I don't need to fix it. I have alternatives that already do what I want. If you want to hector people to use the thing you want them to do, then you had best come correct.
    - Zetice 3y ago
      If you have everything you need, why did you complain? And insults do you no good here. Would any of the hateful words you wrote above mean anything at all to you if I wrote them?
      - boredtofears 3y ago
        > If you have everything you need, why did you complain? Because it’s a forum for discussing technology? Why critique anything with that logic. You must be trolling.
        Zetice 3y ago
        Either you have a concern, in which case you can and should do something about it, or you don’t and just commented for no reason.
  - boredtofears 3y ago
    > Passive voice over a completely open system ?? What does that even mean?
    - Zetice 3y ago
      [flagged]
eropple 3y ago
> Then why bring up IRC’s lack of a “pleasant” app? Because...I was expressing why it isn't fit for purpose? > One doesn’t complain about http because the mobile browser options aren’t to one’s liking. If HTTP was functionally unusable in the application model provided by mobile operating systems, you bet people would complain! But HTTP is stateless. IRC isn't. As such, HTTP is not inherently incompatible with a quality mobile experience. IRC is. And that's not incumbent upon me to fix it--I have no stake. I'm happy with the tools I have. That's incumbent upon people who want other people to use it to fix: the necessity of making something people want to use in order to get them to use it. You get that this is really basic human-interaction stuff, yeah?
- Zetice 3y ago
  You either have a problem or you don’t; since you complained, you do have a problem, and it absolutely is on you to fix. The “basic human interaction” you are failing to understand here is that you’re refusing to accept your role in fixing your own issues. Nobody is obligated to help you, and it’s frankly insulting to presume someone else ought to do anything about your problem for you. The open source community doesn’t owe you shit. Your entitled attitude is toxic.
  - eropple 3y ago
    I have participated in open-source communities for over a decade now. It is likely--not guaranteed, but pretty likely--that I have written more open-source code, both for money and not, than you have. And I am befuddled how you are so toweringly angry about something you're interpreting so directly backwards. I am not saying that IRC has to change to suit me. I never said that. I am saying that IRC is unfit for my purposes. You, as somebody who is advocating for its use, are taking the latter and inferring the former when it was never implied. I don't care if IRC changes, because I have options that better suit me--the net result if nothing changes is that I continue to not use IRC. And I'm fine with that! I'm not over here bemoaning it. There is no value to me unlocked by pulling up stakes from Slack and Discord and going to IRC that is being kept from me because of bad mobile experiences on IRC. My initial post, which has apparently spun you off to the moon for some reason, was pointing out that it remains unfit for my purposes, and that's why I don't use it. Nothing, and I mean literally, nothing else. But you're the one pushing the thing. If you (or other IRC advocates) want me to use it (for whatever reason, network effects usually chief among them), then perhaps you have a problem to solve pursuant to LOE and other needs and all that. That's not my problem, because I have a solution. Usage of your pursuant-to-network-effects protocol of choice is...your...problem. To borrow a phrase from elsewhere, you have product-market fit problems. And it's not other people's responsibility to make the thing you like fit them--they have other choices. If you insist that don't care--well, to me that's also fine, but advocating for the use of something that is unfit-for-purpose and then having an extremely normal day of responses to mild feedback about why other people use alternatives instead is...I mean, if you want to talk about toxic, find a mirror. Your behavior in this thread is shameful.

by Zetice 3y ago

boredtofears 3y ago

You don't have to take responsibility for fixing something just because you criticized it. Fixating on the term used is a tad disingenuous. I think most people reading hacker news understands that the IRC ecosystem is being referenced here - not the protocol itself. IRC has been around 30+ years and it still doesn't have any great clients. If you wanted to build a featureful chat client IRC wouldn't even be a good choice because there is so many things missing from the spec.

Zetice 3y ago
Sorry but this passive voice over a completely open system is intolerable. Fix it yourself. It annoys me.
- eropple 3y ago
  Let's put it as simply as possible, because there's the genuine possibility that you don't understand, rather than are just being an acrimonious troll. You wouldn't be Linux-on-the-desktopping as hard as you are if you didn't want people to use it. As such, if you, as an advocate of a thing, want other people to use it when the alternative is "continue using other things", then the least effective response is "fix it yourself". I don't need to fix it. I have alternatives that already do what I want. If you want to hector people to use the thing you want them to do, then you had best come correct.
  - Zetice 3y ago
    If you have everything you need, why did you complain? And insults do you no good here. Would any of the hateful words you wrote above mean anything at all to you if I wrote them?
    - boredtofears 3y ago
      > If you have everything you need, why did you complain? Because it’s a forum for discussing technology? Why critique anything with that logic. You must be trolling.
      - Zetice 3y ago
        Either you have a concern, in which case you can and should do something about it, or you don’t and just commented for no reason.
- boredtofears 3y ago
  > Passive voice over a completely open system ?? What does that even mean?
  - Zetice 3y ago
    [flagged]

eropple 3y ago

> Then why bring up IRC’s lack of a “pleasant” app? Because...I was expressing why it isn't fit for purpose? > One doesn’t complain about http because the mobile browser options aren’t to one’s liking. If HTTP was functionally unusable in the application model provided by mobile operating systems, you bet people would complain! But HTTP is stateless. IRC isn't. As such, HTTP is not inherently incompatible with a quality mobile experience. IRC is. And that's not incumbent upon me to fix it--I have no stake. I'm happy with the tools I have. That's incumbent upon people who want other people to use it to fix: the necessity of making something people want to use in order to get them to use it. You get that this is really basic human-interaction stuff, yeah?

Zetice 3y ago
You either have a problem or you don’t; since you complained, you do have a problem, and it absolutely is on you to fix. The “basic human interaction” you are failing to understand here is that you’re refusing to accept your role in fixing your own issues. Nobody is obligated to help you, and it’s frankly insulting to presume someone else ought to do anything about your problem for you. The open source community doesn’t owe you shit. Your entitled attitude is toxic.
- eropple 3y ago
  I have participated in open-source communities for over a decade now. It is likely--not guaranteed, but pretty likely--that I have written more open-source code, both for money and not, than you have. And I am befuddled how you are so toweringly angry about something you're interpreting so directly backwards. I am not saying that IRC has to change to suit me. I never said that. I am saying that IRC is unfit for my purposes. You, as somebody who is advocating for its use, are taking the latter and inferring the former when it was never implied. I don't care if IRC changes, because I have options that better suit me--the net result if nothing changes is that I continue to not use IRC. And I'm fine with that! I'm not over here bemoaning it. There is no value to me unlocked by pulling up stakes from Slack and Discord and going to IRC that is being kept from me because of bad mobile experiences on IRC. My initial post, which has apparently spun you off to the moon for some reason, was pointing out that it remains unfit for my purposes, and that's why I don't use it. Nothing, and I mean literally, nothing else. But you're the one pushing the thing. If you (or other IRC advocates) want me to use it (for whatever reason, network effects usually chief among them), then perhaps you have a problem to solve pursuant to LOE and other needs and all that. That's not my problem, because I have a solution. Usage of your pursuant-to-network-effects protocol of choice is...your...problem. To borrow a phrase from elsewhere, you have product-market fit problems. And it's not other people's responsibility to make the thing you like fit them--they have other choices. If you insist that don't care--well, to me that's also fine, but advocating for the use of something that is unfit-for-purpose and then having an extremely normal day of responses to mild feedback about why other people use alternatives instead is...I mean, if you want to talk about toxic, find a mirror. Your behavior in this thread is shameful.