Scaine:

The problem here is that people are talking past each other.  What's
primarily missing is a definition and explanation of the data and data
collection methodology that Shuttleworth and the rest of the design team
are interested in seeing collected and will respect as being good enough
to form the basis of addressing design deficiencies.  Without the
precise details of what the form of the data is that the design team is
interested in reviewing, the external group of people who are interested
in seeing this reverted are casting about making a best effort to
provide the input they feel qualifies as "data."

So far Shuttleworth has disregarded everything people have pointed to as
not meeting his definition of "data."  This can go on forever, further
causing frustration and leading people to assume others in the
conversation are acting in bad faith, until Shuttleworth puts his neck
out and makes an emphatic statement as to what actually constitutes
data.  The ball is in Shuttleworth's court. If he wants to play ball
with the community over the design process...he'll define what the
community needs to do to impact it. If he doesn't want to play ball...he
should just leave it at "trust me" and not talk about wanting "data" and
getting everyone's hopes up.  The more good faith effort people put into
trying to convince him otherwise and being rebuffed as inadequate, the
more emotional its going to get.

The problem is... the design team hasn't set forth a workable process by
which deficiencies in their decision-making can be addressed by
externals.  If Shuttleworth is sincere about desiring data that will
influence decision-making, then he needs to communicate what that means
to the layuser sitting outside the design team and who is sincerely
endeavoring to provide the necessary feedback to impact design
decisions.  Not just this one decision...but a standing process that
applies to quantifiable deficiencies in all the closed door design
decisions.

It also doesn't help that Shuttleworth and the design team are keeping
future plans for the titlebar so private instead of sharing mock-ups as
to what the open space on the right of the title could actually be used
for in 10.10 and beyond. Withholding that sort of information makes it
harder for others to correctly contextualize the short-term pain for
long-term gain of this change.

-- 
[light-theme] please revert the order of the window controls back to 
"menu:minimize,maximize,close"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/532633
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to metacity in ubuntu.

-- 
desktop-bugs mailing list
desktop-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/desktop-bugs

Reply via email to