JTK wrote:
> Garth Wallace wrote:
>
>> JTK wrote:
>>
>>> Garth Wallace wrote:
>>>
>>>> Then leave.
>>>
>>> Leave? What happened to "Open"?
>>
>> Just as you're free to contribute, you're free to go elsewhere.
>
> Ok, then I choose to contribute, by pointing out obvious design flaws,
> and possible ways in which they can be rectified. I also choose to not
> mince words, but tell it like it is, which may make the more sensitive
> religious types uncomfortable. And finally, I also choose to not
> presume to implore others to leave, regardless of what nerves the truth
> hits.
Saying "the project is dead, go home" is indirect, but it's still
telling people to leave.
You also choose to repeatedly complain about problems, even when they've
already been filed as bugs in bugzilla and are being worked on, despite
the fact that whining accomplishes nothing but irritate people on the
newsgroup. And you choose to complain about how things happened in the
past but have already been fixed, despite the fact that there is no way
of making them have been fixed faster without a time machine. *That* is
what I and several others (since apparently people who are not in an
"official position" aren't allowed to use the word "we") dislike about
your messages.
>> And if
>> you don't like it here, why stay?
>
> Because I feel it is my responsibility. Do you think doctors "like it
> here" when they're checking somebody for prostrate cancer, or elbow-deep
> in blood during surgery, or when all else fails, pulling the proverbial
> plug? Yet I have to assume that you would not be so presumptuous as to
> ask them "why stay?".
Well, for one thing, they're getting paid. And they're saving lives, and
as much as I like the Mozilla project I don't have any illusions that a
browser will save somebody's life.
I think it's awfully presumptuous of you to think of your bitching and
moaning as anything even remotely as helpful and respectable as being a
physician.
>>>> Nobody's stopping you. In fact, we're
>>>> encouraging you.
>>>
>>> Ah, so you speak for the Body now? For the People's Browser Party? And
>>> differing points of view need not apply?
>>>
>>> I knew that red star was there for a good reason....
>>
>> I'm speaking as one of the people who reads this group.
>
> Not above you weren't. You were speaking *for* the Group, the Body, the
> People's Republic of Mozilla.
>
>> And judging by
>> the responses you get, I think I'm in the majority on this matter.
>
> What you think in that wise is irrelevant. You are not an "elected
> official" here, are you? You haven't been appointed by Netscape to
> police these newsgroups for anti-Party activities and speak for the
> Party, have you? So I think *I'm* in the majority when I say that you
> have no authority to speak for anyone but yourself when you claim that
> "we're encouraging you" to not participate in this newsgroup.
I have encouraged you not to participate you in this newsgroup. Other
people have too. So my use of the first person plural is perfectly
justified, even if I'm an unelected official (which should be irrelevant
anyway, since like all unmoderated newsgroups there is no "government"
of any kind, democratic or otherwise). If you want to play semantic
games, go right ahead.
>> You're getting "facts" confused with "opinions" again. You should look
>> them up.
>
> You should look up one in particular, one that's been posted here in
> fact: nobody's using Netscape 6 or Mozilla. After three years. Then
> ask yourself "why?".
All those folks who read and post to Mozillazine must be androids then.
Same with the people who submit bug reports to bugzilla. Either you're a
strict solipsist, or your definition of "nobody" is a little hazy.
