3 ms·

They lost me at putting "overreacting" in the title. If that's the way they react to negative user feedback, they deserve more of it. Even Microsoft sometimes

They lost me at putting "overreacting" in the title. If that's the way they react to negative user feedback, they deserve more of it. Even Microsoft sometimes caves in if enough people complain - recall is now optional and I believe opt-in; there's noises about maybe not sticking AI in everything and letting you turn it off in future versions.

glenstein 7mo ago
I don't mind that part, but I do mind resentment based reflexes completely detached from any analysis of any particular wrong. It's perfectly fair game to call it overreactions, and even in this thread, no one seems to be disputing that that's what they are, the main concern is the analogy to Wiki's fundraising practices is an example of normal. Life as an open source developer is often nasty, brutal, and in some cases short if they get pushed out of the game by hostile users who make it feel like a thankless task. They've been trying to sound the alarm on this, and I for one want to be part of what makes these developers thankful for the communities they have rather than frustrated. I know sometimes I suffer from "someone is wrong on the internet" syndrome, and I try and proactively balance out that part of my personality with lots of upvotes on good things (like the people in this thread noting that they donate to the project), and by being supportive of developers and people sharing their hobby projects.
phendrenad2 7mo ago
This is just belligerence and hostility cloaked in concern. This isn't a for-peofit enterprise that will regress back to Internet Explorer toolbar hell if we don't keep reminding them that we don't like it. This is a community-led effort, which you trust enough to run on your desktop, but apparently don't trust enough to not go wild with donation banners. What level of trust is that? Trust only as long as it benefits you?
- red_admiral 7mo ago
  Trust and user experience are two different things. I would trust them not to spy on me and not to gather data for behavioural advertising whether they had no banner, a banner, or an autoplaying video every time you start Docs. I just wouldn't be equally happy with the product in each of those cases. What bothers me is not the banner itself but their reaction to it. Someone who handled this better recently: Mozilla got user feedback on their AI integration, and added an off switch.
  - phendrenad2 7mo ago
    > What bothers me is not the banner itself but their reaction to it. What about the reaction to the banner? Do you care that people are being hostile to a project over a banner, or do you reserve your tone policing for projects responding to hostility?
netule 7mo ago
> They lost me at putting "overreacting" in the title. I think you just proved their point for them.
- nyeah 7mo ago
  Soooo many comments here cite the "overreacting" point and then go on to prove it.

glenstein 7mo ago

I don't mind that part, but I do mind resentment based reflexes completely detached from any analysis of any particular wrong. It's perfectly fair game to call it overreactions, and even in this thread, no one seems to be disputing that that's what they are, the main concern is the analogy to Wiki's fundraising practices is an example of normal. Life as an open source developer is often nasty, brutal, and in some cases short if they get pushed out of the game by hostile users who make it feel like a thankless task. They've been trying to sound the alarm on this, and I for one want to be part of what makes these developers thankful for the communities they have rather than frustrated. I know sometimes I suffer from "someone is wrong on the internet" syndrome, and I try and proactively balance out that part of my personality with lots of upvotes on good things (like the people in this thread noting that they donate to the project), and by being supportive of developers and people sharing their hobby projects.

phendrenad2 7mo ago

This is just belligerence and hostility cloaked in concern. This isn't a for-peofit enterprise that will regress back to Internet Explorer toolbar hell if we don't keep reminding them that we don't like it. This is a community-led effort, which you trust enough to run on your desktop, but apparently don't trust enough to not go wild with donation banners. What level of trust is that? Trust only as long as it benefits you?

red_admiral 7mo ago
Trust and user experience are two different things. I would trust them not to spy on me and not to gather data for behavioural advertising whether they had no banner, a banner, or an autoplaying video every time you start Docs. I just wouldn't be equally happy with the product in each of those cases. What bothers me is not the banner itself but their reaction to it. Someone who handled this better recently: Mozilla got user feedback on their AI integration, and added an off switch.
- phendrenad2 7mo ago
  > What bothers me is not the banner itself but their reaction to it. What about the reaction to the banner? Do you care that people are being hostile to a project over a banner, or do you reserve your tone policing for projects responding to hostility?

netule 7mo ago

> They lost me at putting "overreacting" in the title. I think you just proved their point for them.

nyeah 7mo ago
Soooo many comments here cite the "overreacting" point and then go on to prove it.