5 ms·

>What is this post responding to? And who is the target audience? People making comments like yours? E.g >Reading this feels exactly like reading the passive

>What is this post responding to? And who is the target audience? People making comments like yours? E.g >Reading this feels exactly like reading the passive aggressive facebook posts of someone currently in a fight with their boy/girlfriend. We get it, Rails is "opinionated", sorry I guess we're saying "omakase" these days. Who really gives a fuck? Well, a lot of people don't give a fuck, and that's the problem the post addresses. They want Rails to not be opinionated, or to cater to _their_ opinion. >The reason DHH is getting loud complaints is because people feel that they carry a legitimate grievance but also feel no way to voice that opinion (or are trolls). Douchetastic talking down to them like exemplified in this post won't help (and will encourage trolls). I don't see anything bad (sorry, I guess we're saying "douchetastic" these days) about the post. Sounds like a legitimate complain from the creator of a popular framework. I also fail to see how people feel they "carry a legitimate grievance" but at the same time "feel no way to voice that opinion". If they don't participate in the Rails project, then, no, they don't have a "legitimate grievance". They just have a personal grievance. If, on the other hand they do participate, then they have lots of ways to voice their opinions.

cbs 14y ago
I also fail to see how people feel they [...] This is the kind of thinking I was referencing. You don't see it because you're not in their shoes, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's fine and all that people do disagree, that's just the context for my post. If you want someone to see things your way, build a bridge over the gap in their misunderstanding. DHH's blog post its just preaching to the converted. That's why I asked the context and audience. Saying "Rails is omakase" is a lot like saying "git stores a directed acyclic graph of revisions" or "A monad is just a monoid in the category of endofunctors". Almost nobody gets it unless they already get it, and the behavior he seemed to be complaining about was critcism from the unwashed masses. It just doesn't fit. I asked who gives a fuck because what small sliver of his audience is going to both understand what he is trying to express AND take anything new away from the post? My initial read was wrong, because (to stretch his abused metaphor) he is actually talking about the fact his chefs and regular customers really seem to think 2 tsp of spice in the soup would be better than the 1 tsp he is insistent on using. Which makes his post make even less sense. He could have have ditched the flowery prose, meandering critcisms of criticism and just said "This is important to me, I'm pulling rank."
- dasil003 14y ago
  Maybe it's just something to link to when people complain to him about coffeescript (or any other Rails default) for the umpteenth time.
nailer 14y ago
> If they don't participate in the Rails project, then, no, they don't have a "legitimate grievance". Why don't non-contributing users of a software project have a 'legitimate' opinion? I wonder if this attitude in the late 90s / early 2000s accounts for Linux's level of success as a desktop OS.
- pretoriusB 14y ago
  >Why don't non-contributing users of a software project have a 'legitimate' opinion? Because their opinion gets any legitimacy only by what you paid for it, either by money or work. Some core developers of OSS are accommodating enough to listen to the opinions of random users, but this only happens if said developers are either: 1) really nice guys than enjoy the interaction and/or pushovers. 2) getting something back from it (i.e they play nice because they also sell support or extra stuff and don't want to alienate potential customers) Other than those 2 cases, non-contributing users can have whatever "grievances" they want, but it means nothing at all.
  - quanticle 14y ago
    And that's exactly the reason Linux never took off on the desktop. It's very difficult to gain new users if you're constantly dismissing them and asking them to put up or shut up with code.
    - gnaritas 14y ago
      These things aren't built for users, they're built for developers scratching their own itches. DHH built rails for himself first, and happened to share it for those who like his way of doing things. If you don't like his way, use another framework.
    - pretoriusB 14y ago
      >And that's exactly the reason Linux never took off on the desktop. It's very difficult to gain new users if you're constantly dismissing them and asking them to put up or shut up with code. And it's also why lots of OSS developers could not give a flying duck is Linux took over the desktop or not. They do it for their own fun and benefit, not for some entity called Linux to gain market share.
ryguytilidie 14y ago
>The reason DHH is getting loud complaints is because people feel that they carry a legitimate grievance but also feel no way to voice that opinion (or are trolls). Douchetastic talking down to them like exemplified in this post won't help (and will encourage trolls). I don't see anything bad (sorry, I guess we're saying "douchetastic" these days) about the post. "My pet theory is that it feels like meaningful activism in the moment. They haven't really paid much attention to how things are run on a day-to-day basis, but here's an opportunity to paint some signs and get on the barricades. Yeah, I've done my part! I've taken a stand! Down with.. uhm.. Turbolinks? Or was it CoffeeScript we're protesting this week? Or Bundler? Oh fuck it, down with SOMETHING! YEAH!!!" I mean, you really don't see this as douchey or talking down? How? To me it actually seems impossible to read that and say "Sounds like a legitimate complaint from the creator of a popular framework" unless you already had your mind made up DHH was right no matter what.
- zem 14y ago
  you're completely passing over the fact that there are people with illegitimate grievances, the response to which genuinely should be "well, don't use rails then". i thought dhh's post provided a good analogy for people who don't get that on a software stack level to relate to.
  - ryguytilidie 14y ago
    So? There are tons of people, including both rails core and ruby core contributors with legitimate grievances, in the exact thread in question, that are lumped in with this group DHH is mocking. Its an absolutely terrible analogy and is completely disingenuous to the current situation. This summed it up best in my eyes: "Reading this feels exactly like reading the passive aggressive facebook posts of someone currently in a fight with their boy/girlfriend. "

cbs 14y ago

I also fail to see how people feel they [...] This is the kind of thinking I was referencing. You don't see it because you're not in their shoes, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's fine and all that people do disagree, that's just the context for my post. If you want someone to see things your way, build a bridge over the gap in their misunderstanding. DHH's blog post its just preaching to the converted. That's why I asked the context and audience. Saying "Rails is omakase" is a lot like saying "git stores a directed acyclic graph of revisions" or "A monad is just a monoid in the category of endofunctors". Almost nobody gets it unless they already get it, and the behavior he seemed to be complaining about was critcism from the unwashed masses. It just doesn't fit. I asked who gives a fuck because what small sliver of his audience is going to both understand what he is trying to express AND take anything new away from the post? My initial read was wrong, because (to stretch his abused metaphor) he is actually talking about the fact his chefs and regular customers really seem to think 2 tsp of spice in the soup would be better than the 1 tsp he is insistent on using. Which makes his post make even less sense. He could have have ditched the flowery prose, meandering critcisms of criticism and just said "This is important to me, I'm pulling rank."

dasil003 14y ago
Maybe it's just something to link to when people complain to him about coffeescript (or any other Rails default) for the umpteenth time.

nailer 14y ago

> If they don't participate in the Rails project, then, no, they don't have a "legitimate grievance". Why don't non-contributing users of a software project have a 'legitimate' opinion? I wonder if this attitude in the late 90s / early 2000s accounts for Linux's level of success as a desktop OS.

pretoriusB 14y ago
>Why don't non-contributing users of a software project have a 'legitimate' opinion? Because their opinion gets any legitimacy only by what you paid for it, either by money or work. Some core developers of OSS are accommodating enough to listen to the opinions of random users, but this only happens if said developers are either: 1) really nice guys than enjoy the interaction and/or pushovers. 2) getting something back from it (i.e they play nice because they also sell support or extra stuff and don't want to alienate potential customers) Other than those 2 cases, non-contributing users can have whatever "grievances" they want, but it means nothing at all.
- quanticle 14y ago
  And that's exactly the reason Linux never took off on the desktop. It's very difficult to gain new users if you're constantly dismissing them and asking them to put up or shut up with code.
  - gnaritas 14y ago
    These things aren't built for users, they're built for developers scratching their own itches. DHH built rails for himself first, and happened to share it for those who like his way of doing things. If you don't like his way, use another framework.
  - pretoriusB 14y ago
    >And that's exactly the reason Linux never took off on the desktop. It's very difficult to gain new users if you're constantly dismissing them and asking them to put up or shut up with code. And it's also why lots of OSS developers could not give a flying duck is Linux took over the desktop or not. They do it for their own fun and benefit, not for some entity called Linux to gain market share.

ryguytilidie 14y ago

>The reason DHH is getting loud complaints is because people feel that they carry a legitimate grievance but also feel no way to voice that opinion (or are trolls). Douchetastic talking down to them like exemplified in this post won't help (and will encourage trolls). I don't see anything bad (sorry, I guess we're saying "douchetastic" these days) about the post. "My pet theory is that it feels like meaningful activism in the moment. They haven't really paid much attention to how things are run on a day-to-day basis, but here's an opportunity to paint some signs and get on the barricades. Yeah, I've done my part! I've taken a stand! Down with.. uhm.. Turbolinks? Or was it CoffeeScript we're protesting this week? Or Bundler? Oh fuck it, down with SOMETHING! YEAH!!!" I mean, you really don't see this as douchey or talking down? How? To me it actually seems impossible to read that and say "Sounds like a legitimate complaint from the creator of a popular framework" unless you already had your mind made up DHH was right no matter what.

zem 14y ago
you're completely passing over the fact that there are people with illegitimate grievances, the response to which genuinely should be "well, don't use rails then". i thought dhh's post provided a good analogy for people who don't get that on a software stack level to relate to.
- ryguytilidie 14y ago
  So? There are tons of people, including both rails core and ruby core contributors with legitimate grievances, in the exact thread in question, that are lumped in with this group DHH is mocking. Its an absolutely terrible analogy and is completely disingenuous to the current situation. This summed it up best in my eyes: "Reading this feels exactly like reading the passive aggressive facebook posts of someone currently in a fight with their boy/girlfriend. "