4 ms·

As usual, Gruber seems like a bit of a prick.

by nthitz 14y ago

SuitAndThai 14y ago
It's not terribly hard to see how this whole thing came to be offensive to him. Jeff put Gruber in the public spotlight with a question like "give us permission?" Gruber says 'Yes': whoop de doo Gruber says 'No': Well, the person at fault looks like Gruber for being prohibitive of others trying to improve his work. If his opinion was really to be respected, Jeff should've messaged John behind closed doors to see if he could expect his support or not on this committee, like John had any real say in the matter.
- alexchamberlain 14y ago
  Part of the problem is Gruber is incredibly resistant to change. The software he wrote hasn't changed in 8 years, despite a number of bugs.
  - gordonguthrie 14y ago
    > The software he wrote hasn't changed in 8 years, despite a number of bugs. That isn't the problem. The problem is that the software hasn't changed despite a number of bugs and the source code asking you to submit bugs. 'Deprecate or maintain' is not an unreasonable request of a public persona in the technology sector.
  - troels 14y ago
    well, maybe that's a feature?
- Jonanin 14y ago
  If Gruber says no, then who else besides him is to blame for needlessly attempting to block Markdown's forward progress, especially when it is seriously in need of attention, and when he has not put in any effort to give it some? The person at fault would look like Gruber because the person at fault would be Gruber.
  - kemayo 14y ago
    I sympathize with Gruber's apparent position, which I would summarize thusly: "Markdown is /this/, which I released; it is good enough for me; if it's good enough for you as well, use it; if not, feel free to make something for yourself instead".
    - gordonguthrie 14y ago
      I don't think he is saying that. Jeff Attwood is (I think) asking him to say "I approve, this is going to be a Markdown Spec" or "I disapprove" - in which case it will be a Rockdown Spec. It seems to me that Gruber is adopting a 'Trotsky at Brest-Litovsk' position - "no war, no peace".
      - eric_bullington 14y ago
        This is what I love about HN. Where else would you read a reference to an iconic early 20th-century event[1] in a debate about a parser spec? 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Brest-Litovsk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Brest-Litovsk
- abecedarius 14y ago
  I don't understand. I can see how Gruber could dislike being put on the spot, but what makes it offensive? The implication of any flaw in his work?
jspthrowaway 14y ago
Regardless of how much I dislike Gruber's opinions on occasion, Jeff Atwood is completely steamrolling him here and I really feel for him; it isn't an accident that Jeff blogged about it instead of asking him privately. You do that when you don't care either way what the person says, and it's a completely dick move. As another commenter pointed out, there is no winning move for John Gruber here. That's so obvious that I can't even give Jeff the benefit of the doubt that he overlooked it. This entire experience has left me with a bad taste in my mouth about Jeff Atwood -- I sure hope he doesn't set his sights on something useful that I've created for the world. You can make whatever argument you like about Gruber not "paying enough attention" to his creation, but Markdown doesn't really need to be "fixed" or "standardized". I look forward to the, undoubtedly, dozens of vendor-specific extensions that will be necessary in the final product and we'll end up right back at square one. Really, really presumptuous and poor judgment. Invent your own stuff and let it stand on its merits rather than trading on Markdown's well-established name by force.
- dasil003 14y ago
  Jeff Atwood is a blowhard sure, but you're ignoring the history here. Gruber has refused for years to acknowledge that there are any problems with Markdown at all. Some argue that he has the right to do with his creation as he wishes, but that misses the larger point that Markdown has communal value far outstripping Gruber's original contribution of aggregating a bunch of ascii typographical conventions and compiling them in the spirit of Textile. By sitting on his high horse and proclaiming Markdown "works for him" and that his unspecified version with tons of nasty edge cases is canonical and that not only is it correct, he won't weigh in on any formal specification, he deserves to be case aside and have the project taken forward without him. He doesn't have a moral claim on something as simple and widespread as Markdown, and the fact that he finally has to deal with someone with similar blog reach going on a crusade is nothing worse than he deserves for sticking his head in the sand.
  - jspthrowaway 14y ago
    Your comment reeks so strongly of entitlement that I don't even know where to begin. We could say Twitter was instrumental in organizing human rights causes in the Middle East and is now important to the human race as a communication tool; that said, if Twitter doesn't implement a feature that you want, you don't get to redesign Twitter at your whim and call it "New Twitter". You don't have a "moral claim" to write an open letter to @jack telling him why you're moving on without him. You instead, like all rational people, design a competing service and let your work stand on its own.
gadders 14y ago
Pretty much. Why would the answer be anything other than "Of course! I'm really happy it's getting looked after now I'm busy on projects x, y and z."

As usual, Gruber seems like a bit of a prick.

by nthitz 14y ago

As usual, Gruber seems like a bit of a prick.

It's not terribly hard to see how this whole thing came to be offensive to him. Jeff put Gruber in the public spotlight with a question like "give us permission?" Gruber says 'Yes': whoop de doo Gruber says 'No': Well, the person at fault looks like Gruber for being prohibitive of others trying to improve his work. If his opinion was really to be respected, Jeff should've messaged John behind closed doors to see if he could expect his support or not on this committee, like John had any real say in the matter.

alexchamberlain 14y ago
Part of the problem is Gruber is incredibly resistant to change. The software he wrote hasn't changed in 8 years, despite a number of bugs.
- gordonguthrie 14y ago
  > The software he wrote hasn't changed in 8 years, despite a number of bugs. That isn't the problem. The problem is that the software hasn't changed despite a number of bugs and the source code asking you to submit bugs. 'Deprecate or maintain' is not an unreasonable request of a public persona in the technology sector.
- troels 14y ago
  well, maybe that's a feature?
Jonanin 14y ago
If Gruber says no, then who else besides him is to blame for needlessly attempting to block Markdown's forward progress, especially when it is seriously in need of attention, and when he has not put in any effort to give it some? The person at fault would look like Gruber because the person at fault would be Gruber.
- kemayo 14y ago
  I sympathize with Gruber's apparent position, which I would summarize thusly: "Markdown is /this/, which I released; it is good enough for me; if it's good enough for you as well, use it; if not, feel free to make something for yourself instead".
  - gordonguthrie 14y ago
    I don't think he is saying that. Jeff Attwood is (I think) asking him to say "I approve, this is going to be a Markdown Spec" or "I disapprove" - in which case it will be a Rockdown Spec. It seems to me that Gruber is adopting a 'Trotsky at Brest-Litovsk' position - "no war, no peace".
    - eric_bullington 14y ago
      This is what I love about HN. Where else would you read a reference to an iconic early 20th-century event[1] in a debate about a parser spec? 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Brest-Litovsk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Brest-Litovsk
abecedarius 14y ago
I don't understand. I can see how Gruber could dislike being put on the spot, but what makes it offensive? The implication of any flaw in his work?

jspthrowaway 14y ago

Regardless of how much I dislike Gruber's opinions on occasion, Jeff Atwood is completely steamrolling him here and I really feel for him; it isn't an accident that Jeff blogged about it instead of asking him privately. You do that when you don't care either way what the person says, and it's a completely dick move. As another commenter pointed out, there is no winning move for John Gruber here. That's so obvious that I can't even give Jeff the benefit of the doubt that he overlooked it. This entire experience has left me with a bad taste in my mouth about Jeff Atwood -- I sure hope he doesn't set his sights on something useful that I've created for the world. You can make whatever argument you like about Gruber not "paying enough attention" to his creation, but Markdown doesn't really need to be "fixed" or "standardized". I look forward to the, undoubtedly, dozens of vendor-specific extensions that will be necessary in the final product and we'll end up right back at square one. Really, really presumptuous and poor judgment. Invent your own stuff and let it stand on its merits rather than trading on Markdown's well-established name by force.

dasil003 14y ago
Jeff Atwood is a blowhard sure, but you're ignoring the history here. Gruber has refused for years to acknowledge that there are any problems with Markdown at all. Some argue that he has the right to do with his creation as he wishes, but that misses the larger point that Markdown has communal value far outstripping Gruber's original contribution of aggregating a bunch of ascii typographical conventions and compiling them in the spirit of Textile. By sitting on his high horse and proclaiming Markdown "works for him" and that his unspecified version with tons of nasty edge cases is canonical and that not only is it correct, he won't weigh in on any formal specification, he deserves to be case aside and have the project taken forward without him. He doesn't have a moral claim on something as simple and widespread as Markdown, and the fact that he finally has to deal with someone with similar blog reach going on a crusade is nothing worse than he deserves for sticking his head in the sand.
- jspthrowaway 14y ago
  Your comment reeks so strongly of entitlement that I don't even know where to begin. We could say Twitter was instrumental in organizing human rights causes in the Middle East and is now important to the human race as a communication tool; that said, if Twitter doesn't implement a feature that you want, you don't get to redesign Twitter at your whim and call it "New Twitter". You don't have a "moral claim" to write an open letter to @jack telling him why you're moving on without him. You instead, like all rational people, design a competing service and let your work stand on its own.

gadders 14y ago

Pretty much. Why would the answer be anything other than "Of course! I'm really happy it's getting looked after now I'm busy on projects x, y and z."