3 ms·

This was your contribution to that thread last month [0]. Now a month after that insightful contribution you're on HN posting editorialized titles trying to get

This was your contribution to that thread last month [0]. Now a month after that insightful contribution you're on HN posting editorialized titles trying to get sympathy? Given your behavior in that thread I'm just impressed at how well the Vercel folks handled your aggression. Maybe it's time to take your own advice and try a different framework instead of wasting time trashing on one you don't like. [0] https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/64660#discussioncomment-13044166 https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/64660#discussi...

antisol 1y ago
It seems someone hasn't been very thorough in their investigation. Actually, this user has been posting in this thread for months - the earliest post I saw was in January. The user posted several times asking for updates as to whether this feature was planned or not, fairly politely it seems to me, and was totally ignored as far as I can see. After repeatedly asking for updates and having no response whatsoever, it seems they became disillusioned. Which I think isn't unreasonable - it's my opinion that it's pretty rude for a maintainer to ignore reasonable questions put to them, and that it's quite reasonable to be offended when you are ignored in this way. You talk about "aggression", I say ignoring people is an act of aggression, and it seems to me that this user has simply responded in kind. We could get into a discussion on whether a maintainer has any responsibility to respond to users asking questions, and then use that as a basis for deciding whether specific posts by this user were justified or not, but my point is that the picture you paint with your post is inaccurate and incomplete. At best.
- lolinder 1y ago
  No, I was very thorough: I saw every comment and pulled out the obscene, aggressive, offensive acrostic embedded in months of harassing tagging of the target of that acrostic because that recent pattern of behavior overshadows everything else. There's no excuse for that entry no matter how frustrated they get. Vercel owes them nothing—and the specific employee OP chose as a target owes them even less—and this entitled behavior is a long-standing plague on open source that needs to be called out and soundly condemned. If they need the feature so desperately they can add it themselves (Vercel already said it's something they want to implement!) or switch frameworks.
  - jemiluv8 1y ago
    This has been a plague for so long it nearly threatened the rails project. It also inspired a very interesting article https://dhh.dk/2012/rails-is-omakase.html https://dhh.dk/2012/rails-is-omakase.html about the maintainer that provides a framework of sorts for thinking about issues regarding open source entitlement
    - lolinder 1y ago
      Thanks, I hadn't read that before and it's a great piece! > If most things on the menu disgust you, what on earth are you still doing at the table? The door is right over there, try not to slam it on your way out.
    - antisol 1y ago
      Interesting, thanks for sharing. ...but did you notice how the entire scenario presented in this article is predicated on the person who made their suggestion actually getting a response? "I'm sorry, but hotdogs don't really fit our sushi menu, and while you may not care for unagi, we picked it for a reason. But thanks for the suggestions!" Totally reasonable response. Polite. Reasonable explanation. 10/10 response. Totally unreasonable to then start insisting that hot dogs be added. The example scenario isn't "person asks the waiter for a hot dog; waiter just keeps walking past them, blanking them as if they don't even exist". I would be curious to know why OP chose to post this today, 3 weeks after they said they were working on it. That's an interesting detail.
      - lolinder 1y ago
        > The example scenario isn't "person asks the waiter for a hot dog; waiter just keeps walking past them, blanking them as if they don't even exist". First: that scenario is actually still just fine when the establishment is a soup kitchen. When the people providing the service are providing it for free funded entirely out of their own pocket then no user of the free service is entitled to anything, ever. Second: that isn't an accurate description of what happened, as you should know because you read the thread in full. What actually happened is that a maintainer responded to the issue back in January with a soft timeline. OP began harassing that maintainer less than halfway through the provided timeline. When they got ignored for just over a week (which is, again, entirely reasonable especially given that a timeline was already offered) OP proceeded to write not one but three "FUCKUJimmy" acrostics further harassing the maintainer who had provided the initial timeline. Then, on May 9, which is well within the initial estimate, the maintainer provided an update saying that the timeline had to be pushed back. OP's reaction to that was to try to bring the project hate on HN. In what universe is any of this behavior by OP acceptable?

antisol 1y ago

It seems someone hasn't been very thorough in their investigation. Actually, this user has been posting in this thread for months - the earliest post I saw was in January. The user posted several times asking for updates as to whether this feature was planned or not, fairly politely it seems to me, and was totally ignored as far as I can see. After repeatedly asking for updates and having no response whatsoever, it seems they became disillusioned. Which I think isn't unreasonable - it's my opinion that it's pretty rude for a maintainer to ignore reasonable questions put to them, and that it's quite reasonable to be offended when you are ignored in this way. You talk about "aggression", I say ignoring people is an act of aggression, and it seems to me that this user has simply responded in kind. We could get into a discussion on whether a maintainer has any responsibility to respond to users asking questions, and then use that as a basis for deciding whether specific posts by this user were justified or not, but my point is that the picture you paint with your post is inaccurate and incomplete. At best.

lolinder 1y ago
No, I was very thorough: I saw every comment and pulled out the obscene, aggressive, offensive acrostic embedded in months of harassing tagging of the target of that acrostic because that recent pattern of behavior overshadows everything else. There's no excuse for that entry no matter how frustrated they get. Vercel owes them nothing—and the specific employee OP chose as a target owes them even less—and this entitled behavior is a long-standing plague on open source that needs to be called out and soundly condemned. If they need the feature so desperately they can add it themselves (Vercel already said it's something they want to implement!) or switch frameworks.
- jemiluv8 1y ago
  This has been a plague for so long it nearly threatened the rails project. It also inspired a very interesting article https://dhh.dk/2012/rails-is-omakase.html https://dhh.dk/2012/rails-is-omakase.html about the maintainer that provides a framework of sorts for thinking about issues regarding open source entitlement
  - lolinder 1y ago
    Thanks, I hadn't read that before and it's a great piece! > If most things on the menu disgust you, what on earth are you still doing at the table? The door is right over there, try not to slam it on your way out.
  - antisol 1y ago
    Interesting, thanks for sharing. ...but did you notice how the entire scenario presented in this article is predicated on the person who made their suggestion actually getting a response? "I'm sorry, but hotdogs don't really fit our sushi menu, and while you may not care for unagi, we picked it for a reason. But thanks for the suggestions!" Totally reasonable response. Polite. Reasonable explanation. 10/10 response. Totally unreasonable to then start insisting that hot dogs be added. The example scenario isn't "person asks the waiter for a hot dog; waiter just keeps walking past them, blanking them as if they don't even exist". I would be curious to know why OP chose to post this today, 3 weeks after they said they were working on it. That's an interesting detail.
    - lolinder 1y ago
      > The example scenario isn't "person asks the waiter for a hot dog; waiter just keeps walking past them, blanking them as if they don't even exist". First: that scenario is actually still just fine when the establishment is a soup kitchen. When the people providing the service are providing it for free funded entirely out of their own pocket then no user of the free service is entitled to anything, ever. Second: that isn't an accurate description of what happened, as you should know because you read the thread in full. What actually happened is that a maintainer responded to the issue back in January with a soft timeline. OP began harassing that maintainer less than halfway through the provided timeline. When they got ignored for just over a week (which is, again, entirely reasonable especially given that a timeline was already offered) OP proceeded to write not one but three "FUCKUJimmy" acrostics further harassing the maintainer who had provided the initial timeline. Then, on May 9, which is well within the initial estimate, the maintainer provided an update saying that the timeline had to be pushed back. OP's reaction to that was to try to bring the project hate on HN. In what universe is any of this behavior by OP acceptable?