On 11.04.2014, at 20:56, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Max Horn wrote:
>> On 11.04.2014, at 17:21, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Max Horn wrote:
>>>> On 11.04.2014, at 15:29, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Max Horn wrote:
>>>>> You don't think red represent an oldness in Git? Whereas green
>>>>> represents progress?
>>>> No, I don't think that.
>>> Then you belong to the minority of Git users. Those of us that see
>>> patches day and night, red is old, green is new.
>> Hasty generalization.
> You don't know what a hasty generalization is.

That is another hasty generalization...

> If you want me to explain it to
> you, send me a personal e-mail, you are polluting the discussion enough as it
> is.

... and that is pure hubris and arrogance. :-)

>> Come back when you have facts, as opposed to the illusion that you are the
>> spokesperson of the (apparently silent) majority of Git users.
> Facts:
> 1) A hunk that removed (-) is represented in red [1]
> 2) A hunk that added (+) is represented in green [1]
> 3) A file that is removed is represented in red [2]
> 4) A file that is added or modified is represented in green [2]
> 5) A test that fails is represented in red [3]
> 6) A test that succeeds is represented in green [3]
> 7) The current Git logo (accordo to some people) has "-" in red, "+" in green 
> [4]

I do not dispute any of that.

> Given these facts, it's reasonable to assume that to the majority of Git users
> red is old and bad, green is new and good.

This is where you are making the hasty generalization. Your facts do not 
suffice to prove this conclusion. 

And even if the conclusion is true (which is possible despite your flawed 
argument, although I doubt it), then you are making another implicit 
assumption: Namely that people will automatically transfer the red/green 
principle from diffs and test results to logos. 

Look, it's exactly this kind of non-sense pseudo-rationalization that leads big 
companies to follow what "market researchers" tell them they absolutely must do 
to make their customers happy, and then fail big with it because emotional 
stuff like that doesn't work with pure logic.

If you want to know what Git users think about the various logo variants, ask 
them *exactly that*. Indeed, that might be a helpful contribution.

But do not ask them something else, and then pretend you can deduce from that 
what they will think about the logo. And in particular, please stop claiming 
that you don't even have to ask them that, because you already supposedly know 
-- you somehow being representative of the majority of Git users, while 
everybody who disagrees with you automatically is in the minority. You can do 
that if you are e.g. leader of North Korea, but nobody here is buying that.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Reply via email to