Why else would they unilaterally do this
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tracyanne Nov 16, 2010 4:08 AM EDT |
Quoting:...to complaints that it seems to be designed to benefit Canonical... Of course it exists to benefit Canonical, it's part of their marketing of Ubuntu. Don't you know, Canonical is the epitome of Community, it's what the word Ubuntu means. So all must follow where they lead. |
| jacog Nov 16, 2010 4:22 AM EDT |
Quoting:it's what the word Ubuntu means Well, what it loosely implies anyway. |
| cabreh Nov 16, 2010 5:39 AM EDT |
Well, I for one actually went to that web site and read what is posted there. It is something that could be put up on any distribution's site. It does not even mention either Ubuntu nor Canonical. Neither does it attack nor criticize anyone or any distribution. So, what is the justification (other than membership in the "I hate Ubuntu club") for attacking this new site? And no, everyone doesn't HAVE to follow (or use) Ubuntu. You MAY. That's the whole point of FOSS. At least that's what I've always thought. |
| tracyanne Nov 16, 2010 7:34 AM EDT |
@cabreh, it's about Canonical claiming the moral high ground for the purpose of marketing. The whole "combya" thing fits perfectly with the image Shuttleworth wants portrayed of Canonical. The implication, by putting up this site unilaterally, is that Canonical and only Canonical is concerned about commuity. It's marketing bulldust. Also stop with this Ubuntu hate club rubbish, I'm an Ubuntu user. I have 4 computers running Ubuntu and 2 running Mint. The difference between you and I, is I'm not blinded by the Canonical/Ubuntu marketing machine. Putting up this site is very passive aggressive. It creates a sense for other distributors/companies that they are on the back foot, that they have to follow along, or appear to be anti community, it's quite divisive actually. i can understand completely why the Red Hat representatives are upset. |
| hkwint Nov 16, 2010 7:43 AM EDT |
In my opinion 'unilateral' and 'open' don't mix that well. Of course, you can dump code of any piece of software, like done with OOXML and to a lesser degree Android, and then the 'source' is open, but the project not so much. "Dumping" seems to be what Canonical did, not collaborating on some text and then releasing, but first writing it in a closed environment, then dumping, then opening it. Normally, 'dumping' isn't perceived as "respecting the community". So I think Canonical leaned yet another lesson. |
| bigg Nov 16, 2010 8:01 AM EDT |
> So I think Canonical leaned yet another lesson. If you mean "learned" I disagree. They do what they want. |
| cabreh Nov 16, 2010 9:37 AM EDT |
@tracyanne
Nope, I'm not blinded at all. But, I don't feel the need to wear a tin foil hat either. I too am willing to leave the use of Ubuntu whenever it no longer works for me. I've already said I won't use Unity because I don't like it. If I was blinded I'd be praising it. And I may not want Wayland when it comes along either. As to the club line, well all you have to do is look at comments to anything Ubuntu. One great example is the Wayland announcement. Ubuntu announces they will be trying to change to it and the comments were blistering. A Fedora developer says they will probably move to it as well and how many complaints? Was it even covered here on LXer? It may be I just missed it. The strange thing is Wayland is a RedHat/Fedora project to begin with. Rather abusively pointed out by someone as another attack on Ubuntu. How dare they use a FOSS project created by RedHat? Passive-aggressive? As opposed to the purely aggressive attacks against the site? Yeah, well, that's your view. |
| tracyanne Nov 16, 2010 9:51 AM EDT |
Quoting:Passive-aggressive? As opposed to the purely aggressive attacks against the site? Yeah, well, that's your view. That's the way passive aggressive works. Then the passive aggressive gets to claim the moral high ground "see I was perfectly reasonable all the time, while they attacked me" The thing is this isn't about community, it's about Canonical Marketing. They already claim to be the distributor that's really into community, the Ubuntu trademark has all sorts of such connotations, and by launching this site without any consultation with other companies/distributors, they've set the stage to demonstrate how they are the real community people, who respect everyone. when in fact doing this, this way, shows a complete lack of respect. An arrogant disregard for others. |
| cabreh Nov 16, 2010 10:31 AM EDT |
I still don't understand this take on a company doing self promotion. You think it's wrong somehow. So, I guess RedHat is just as guilty? Or Madrake/Mandriva/Or whatever it's called now? Or Novell/SUSE? Or any other for-profit organization? Why? Or is it only Canonical that isn't allowed to do this for some perverse reason? I think someone, anyone, promoting the use of Linux is good. Right now there are few others who have done so much to make a version of Linux so well known to the general population as opposed to just the corporate groups. If they somehow profit from this, more power to them. If they start making a distribution I no longer find usable I'll move on. However, I wouldn't start attacking them because they are going their own way. It's FOSS. They can't steal it. Let Canonical do what they want. Just like I let RedHat or SUSE do their thing and don't use them. |
| tuxchick Nov 16, 2010 11:29 AM EDT |
It's the 'I hate Ubuntu club' for sure whinging about OpenRespect.org. It's nuts. Jono Bacon started it on his own time as a community project. People are reading all kinds of meaning into it that isn't there. Jono has no magic mind control powers that will overpower visitors to openrespect.org, and it's not a Canonical project. Jono is many things; a liar is not one of them. As usual, when anyone takes a stand for civility the brickbats fly. Which rather reinforces the necessity. |
| jdixon Nov 16, 2010 12:07 PM EDT |
> I still don't understand this take on a company doing self promotion. Because they're pretending that's not what they're doing. That's called hypocrisy. Or at least that's how people are taking it. |
| cabreh Nov 16, 2010 1:31 PM EDT |
Well, I guess if Tuxchick is correct then perhaps people are taking the site the wrong way. Maybe because they are so used to trying to find fault with Ubuntu all the time? |
| jdixon Nov 16, 2010 1:50 PM EDT |
> ...then perhaps people are taking the site the wrong way. That's entirely possible, yes. I haven't even looked at the site, so I can't say. > Maybe because they are so used to trying to find fault with Ubuntu all the time? Possibly. But that's always the case with the market leader. It was the same with Red Hat before Ubuntu came along. And it's not like Ubuntu is perfect and without fault. |
| azerthoth Nov 16, 2010 2:08 PM EDT |
There are the fanbois for whom $DISTRO can do no wrong, conversely there are the anti-fanbois who see that $DISTRO can do no right. For the anti-fanboi anything that remotely touches there favorite whipping post must be tainted as well. The bigger and more popular any $DISTRO becomes the larger and louder both groups become. Ubuntu passed critcal mass of both groups some time ago, and rightly so. Personally I wouldnt count myself in the anti column. While I dont recommend it to new users as I believe there are better new user distros out there, it is among the better of them for that task. OTOH I see what I consider several critical flaws with it as well. The 6 month push it regardless schedule, and the screaming, hollering, yelling, hold my breath till I turn blue treatment for anyone who doesnt want to match the same schedule being one of the major ones. Another is the like it or lump it approach to their community. Then there is the generational bugs, where fixes have been spoon fed to the devs and promptly ignored for release cycle after release cycle. It's not bashing to point out these things, it's honesty, and refusing to admit that the emperor is wearing no clothes by ignoring anything negative serves no one. It just makes those of us that look at it in a wholly technical light just start dismissing the (anti-) fanbois as the results of fevered minds. |
| tuxchick Nov 16, 2010 2:34 PM EDT |
Well there's the key, az, is the criticism based on something, or just habitual? With regards to Jono and OpenRespect I think it's habitual. |
| azerthoth Nov 16, 2010 2:48 PM EDT |
I agree TC, the negatives seems to be of the knee jerking variety. OTOH I ask my self, if you, helios, stephen, caitlyn or anyone else had done the same what would my reaction have been? In honesty I think that my reaction would have been identical to the one I have here. which is to say: "Can't we all just get along?" == fail No insult intended to any of the named, just a nutshell synopsis. |
| flufferbeer Nov 16, 2010 3:05 PM EDT |
@cabreh
You wrote "And no, everyone doesn't HAVE to follow (or use) Ubuntu. You MAY. That's the whole point of FOSS." This reminds me of the famous quote Henry Ford might have said: "Any customer MAY have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it HAS to be black." I have little doubt that Mark Shuttleworth thinks identical sentiments for his high and mighty Ubuntu. -fb |
| cabreh Nov 16, 2010 3:12 PM EDT |
@flufferbeer
You may be entirely correct. Do I agree with all Mark Shuttleworth does? No. On the other hand, unlike at the time of Henry Ford's famous saying, there are alternatives to Ubuntu that don't cost any more. So, the comparison isn't really accurate. Back in Ford's day he could say that because there wasn't the same alternative. At least not for a while. |
| azerthoth Nov 16, 2010 3:19 PM EDT |
Actually cabreh from a historical view point there are similarities, Henry Ford due to his innovations could compete on price point alone. Quality, workmanship, and customization were what his contemporaries could offer that he did not. Shuttleworth, Jobs, and Henry Ford before them all have that one thing in common, "They can have it in any color they want, as long as it is black." mentality. It's a proven method, it just sucks for anyone who has more imagination than a lemming. |
| tracyanne Nov 16, 2010 5:40 PM EDT |
Quoting:Well, I guess if Tuxchick is correct then perhaps people are taking the site the wrong way. Maybe because they are so used to trying to find fault with Ubuntu all the time? Except I don't try to find fault with Ubuntu all the time, I use Ubuntu. I think you mean Canonical in any case, and I don't try to find fault with them either. I have been to the site, I have read it, I also followed the links to jono Bacons blog. It was after reading them that I still consider this a marketing action by Canonical, an attempt to claim the moral high ground, an attempt to prmote Canonical/Ubuntu as the community people/Distribution. I think that by doing this this way, it is divisive. |
| kingttx Nov 16, 2010 7:16 PM EDT |
Good grief, mountains out of molehills. |
| vainrveenr Nov 16, 2010 7:22 PM EDT |
Quoting:an attempt to claim the moral high ground, an attempt to promote Canonical/Ubuntu as the community people/Distribution. I think that by doing this this way, it is divisive.Perhaps surprisingly (or perhaps not so?), others have also addressed the divisiveness inherently perceived in Jono Bacon's efforts. Bacon initially made his 'The OpenRespect Declaration' found at http://openrespect.org/ Fairly recently, a "shift-key-challenged KDE hacker" with the handle asiego published a piece entitled 'commonality and community' found at http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2010/11/commonality-and-community... asiego's piece concerns the OpenRespect Declaration paragraph that starts off with Irrespective of these methods, opinions, definitions, and differences... From asiego, Quoting:the statement is great for people within a given community (any given community), but I do not believe it to be applicable between communities as written. With something like respect, if you set up a set of non-applicable aspirations, it will only cause more problems than it solves.asiego then proceeds to explain how Bacon's OpenRespect Declaration is indeed a "set of non-applicable aspirations" that does "cause more problems than it solves" and therefore may indeed promote divisiveness rather than alleviate it. asiego organizes his explanation through the following four main assertions: 1. Respect is Cultural. Respect is communicated and earned in culturally specific ways. 2. Assumed Respect is to Earned Respect as Glass is to Plexiglass. Assumed respect fails where earned respect holds up. 3. Respect is a modifier, but in which direction? Respect does not actually equate to better treatment. 4. Respect, Inter- versus Intra-community. Respect operates under different assumptions within a community versus between communities. asiego's four assertions here make an interesting read. Near the end of 'commonality and community', asiego touches on the core reason for divisiveness within Bacon's seemingly "open-ended" declaration: Quoting:There is a mention of honesty in debate, but the undermining effect of half-truths, convenient positioning and other tactics that undermine community relations outside of debate are not covered at all (in the OpenRespect Declaration), despite [honesty] being a key to building as well as demonstrating respect. Can Jono Bacon and his supporters within Canonical and outside of it actually achieve this honesty, or will this Declaration merely remain as "convenient positioning", posturing, and lip-service ??? |
| tracyanne Nov 16, 2010 7:28 PM EDT |
Not really kingttx, Jono Bacon is the Ubuntu Community Manager, he works for Canonical, if it had been anyone else, this would have been believable as an attempt by someone to get FOSS communities to "just get along" (about as easy as herding cats, in any case). But given that this keys in to the marketing objectives of Canonical, it seems just a little too much of a coincidence. The fact that other distributors/companies/communities were not asked for input/involvement prior to the launching of the site makes it less of a community (in the general sense) than a purely Canonical driven thing. It's bound to upset a lot of people, simply because it makes them look like dills, and coincidentally seems designed to give Canonical the moral high ground with respect to concern for community. |
| tuxchick Nov 16, 2010 9:00 PM EDT |
Quoting: Good grief, mountains out of molehills. Yup. Tinfoil out of thin air. If it were Mark Shuttleworth behind this I would don my own tinfoil hat, with pride. Jono's not Mark, and I believe him when he says this is his own deal. Kind of a low blow to call his honesty into question with nothing to back it up. |
| tracyanne Nov 16, 2010 9:28 PM EDT |
TC, there is no good reason to believe Jono Bacon, if he says it's his baby. He does work for Canonical in a marketing position, and that alone is good reason to disbelieve any statements that distance Canonical from this. This sort of thing fits perfectly with Canonicals Marketing Strategy. If it were absolutely clear that Mark Shuttleworth was behind it the guess work would not be required. |
| Steven_Rosenber Nov 16, 2010 9:44 PM EDT |
I don't know Jono, but I've heard him on plenty of podcasts. He's one of those guys who has a lot going on. I don't know how he has time to be Ubuntu community manager, to do Severed Fifth and live some kind of normal life besides. I know that he stopped doing Shot of Jaq and FOSS Weekly; he was overcommitted with way too many projects on his personal plate. I'm not in that league, but we all try to cram extra stuff into our lives, and I imagine we all (and definitely I) try things out and give up some because they just fall off our crowded radar. For Jono to think about this "be nice to each other" thing, roll out a quick WordPress-driven site and then hope to gather a community around it - this is another thing that could stick or fall by the wayside over the next few months. My take is that Ubuntu/Canonical has more than enough of its own trouble for Jono to be worrying about the civility (or lack thereof) of the entire FOSS world. And here's my point (glad I creeped up on it, aren't you?): Jono is supposed to be Community Manager for Ubuntu. But he seems to function as Ubuntu Spokesman (or PR Manager). I don't think that one person doing both of these jobs (community manager and distro spokesman) is a good fit. If there is somebody who is supposed to be the actual Ubuntu spokesperson, I sure don't know who it is. I can't remember what Matt Asay's Canonical title is, but he pretty much fell off the radar (and stopped doing his Cnet blog) as soon as he started with Canonical. Another thing I'd like to throw out there: As much as users of other distros and developers of upstream projects complain about Ubuntu sucking all the air out of what they're doing, my take on this dynamic is that Ubuntu brings a whole lot more people and awareness to the entire FOSS world than it takes away by being so gosh-darned popular (both in actual use and chatter across the Internet). Call Ubuntu a gateway distro for the rest of FOSS. That's how I see it. Between Jono Bacon, Mark Shuttleworth, Matt Asay and Jane Silber, I don't feel like there's one person responsible for public relations (apart from community management; the whole world and the media ain't the community). Look at the Canonical Management Team page: http://www.canonical.com/about-canonical/overview/management... Jono's not on it, nor is there a chief spokesperson/PR manager. They need one. |
| tuxchick Nov 16, 2010 11:40 PM EDT |
That's cool TA, by your reasoning we can call anyone a liar just because we don't feel like believing them. |
| vainrveenr Nov 17, 2010 12:52 AM EDT |
Quoting:by your reasoning we can call anyone a liar just because we don't feel like believing themAnd yet the great philosopher Soren Kierkegaard deftly reasons through two opposing beliefs in truth and lying (untruth) of the "we" and the "them" within the Oregon State University-published piece 'The Crowd is Untruth' : Quoting:There is a view of life which holds that where the crowd is, the truth is also, that it is a need in truth itself, that it must have the crowd on its side. There is another view of life; which holds that wherever the crowd is, there is untruth, so that, for a moment to carry the matter out to its farthest conclusion, even if every individual possessed the truth in private, yet if they came together into a crowd (so that "the crowd" received any decisive, voting, noisy, audible importance), untruth would at once be let in.(source: http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/Philosophers/... ) Therefore, according to Kierkegaard's second view above, should the crowd of pro-Bacon advocates -- or anti-Bacon or "Bacon-neutral"advocates for that matter -- come together to receive "any decisive, voting, noisy, audible importance", then lying (untruth) must immediately disseminate. The "Bacon" here is of course Jono Bacon; not the great philosopher of the same last name who lived more than two centuries before Kierkegaard ! What noisy and audible consensus has this reading crowd decided upon regarding Jono Bacon's non-tinfoil impartiality in his OpenRespect Declaration' ?? |
| tracyanne Nov 17, 2010 1:50 AM EDT |
Quoting:by your reasoning we can call anyone a liar just because we don't feel like believing them. Not quite TC. There is no good reason, that I've seen, to believe other than that this is part of Canonical Marketing exercise. It's not about don't feel like, it's about not seeing any good reason to do so. Given the evidence available, that he's in a Marketing position with Canonical etc... well you know where I think the balance of probability falls. |
| Steven_Rosenber Nov 17, 2010 2:59 AM EDT |
Jono needs $5k: http://www.jonobacon.org/2010/11/16/the-severed-fifth-record... |
| jacog Nov 17, 2010 8:01 AM EDT |
ta, let's assume all of what you believe is true - what does it really matter? If you read the contents of the page that's up there at the moment, the words therein can be applied to anything, and really a bit of respect and tolerance for others is a good thing in any community. |
| tracyanne Nov 17, 2010 8:56 AM EDT |
Because jacog, if I'm right (and the reasons I've given appear to be what's upsetting the Red Hat blokes), it's a case of do what I say, not what I do. And as has been pointed on on many occasions some people deserve neither respect nor tolerance... (sexism anyone) |
| tuxchick Nov 17, 2010 5:10 PM EDT |
TA, I think you have your own idea of what evidence is. |
| tracyanne Nov 17, 2010 5:54 PM EDT |
Quoting:TA, I think you have your own idea of what evidence is. There's really no answer to that, is there? I must be wrong. |
| hkwint Nov 17, 2010 7:31 PM EDT |
bigg: Since Jono admits he screwed up a tiny bit, I think they learned. Cabreh: You really believe if Fedora would have chosen to move to Wayland first, reactions would have been different? Probably, yes, but not by more than a factor half. The 'hype' is caused because Ubuntu was first to say they'd move to Wayland, if the community would have perceived some other mayor distro being 'the first to ditch Xorg', there would've been plenty of fuss as well. And Fedora making use of Wayland, well, such is to be expected if they start developing it in first place! However, I totally agree, lots of people read far too much in the announcement. MS clearly stated the switch could happen "several years in the future"; too few people respected that 'disclaimer' IMHO. Also, what some people fail to notice is developers of Xorg might work on Wayland as well, and as far as I understood Wayland is only a 'possible replacement' for Xorg-server, and not for 'whole' Xorg. |
| Steven_Rosenber Nov 17, 2010 9:20 PM EDT |
Kernel mode setting is already making life miserable for users of "legacy" hardware (with "legacy" meaning any hardware that doesn't happen to work with KMS, regardless of age). |
| tuxchick Nov 17, 2010 9:33 PM EDT |
TA, yes there is an answer-- evidence is something you can present to back up your assertions. Other people can look at it. You're calling Jono a liar with nothing to back it up. I know and respect Jono, and take exception to him being slimed. |
| tracyanne Nov 18, 2010 1:00 AM EDT |
The evidence is 1. that he's in a marketing position at Canonical, 2. that this whole thing fits in with how Canonical Markets itself (all combya and community.. Ubuntu the word has many connotations that speak of community), the whole Open Respect Philosophy, as published, is a very close fit to Canonical's stated aspirations regarding it's community. 3. It was done without any consultation with other Communities.Quoting:You're calling Jono a liar with nothing to back it up. I know and respect Jono, and take exception to him being slimed. Don't try putting words in my mouth. I said: Quoting:there is no good reason to believe Jono Bacon and Quoting:There is no good reason, that I've seen, to believe other than that this is part of Canonical Marketing exercise. I never called the man a liar. I said I don't believe it's not a Canonical Marketing exercise. I repeat there is no good reason to believe Jono Bacon, when I see one I'll change my mind, until then, if it looks like Dog turd and smells like Dog turd, there's a damn good chance it will be Dog turd. I don't know the bloke from Adam, so I have no good reason to believe other than what the evidence I've seen tells me. Convince me other wise with counter evidence, not assertions, and don't go attempting to put words into my mouth. People who go around doing that sort of thing usually can't back up their assertions, and so resort to personal attacks. I thought more of you than that. |
| cabreh Nov 18, 2010 3:20 AM EDT |
@Tracyanne If a person says something and you say that statement cannot be believed, then what are you saying other than "that person is lying"? You could say, that person doesn't understand what they are talking about I guess, but that doesn't fit what you are saying. Ergo, you said Jono is a liar. There is no other interpretation. Also, because someone works for the Public Relations department (not necessarily Marketing) doesn't naturally mean that person is always lying. Something else you seem to be saying. And if it is a public relations exercise by Canonical/Ubuntu what is the big issue here. Going by the very regular attacks on most articles about Ubuntu maybe they think anything to help may be a good thing. I read Aaron's article about it and I'm afraid I heartily disagree with his take on how you should react to others. Maybe it's because I'm old enough to have be brought up with the rule of respecting elders and such that I give respect to people until they show they don't deserve it. Rather than acting like a modern day child and not respecting anyone unless I think they fit my view of deserving it. |
| tracyanne Nov 18, 2010 5:08 AM EDT |
We're at that point where it seems I must start repeating myself, in order for those that haven't read from the begining to catch up. |
| jdixon Nov 18, 2010 6:57 AM EDT |
> Also, because someone works for the Public Relations department (not necessarily Marketing) doesn't naturally mean that person is always lying. No, but in my experience, it's a pretty safe bet. At least when making statements concerning their company, competitors, or the industry in which they work. > And if it is a public relations exercise by Canonical/Ubuntu what is the big issue here. See "hypocrisy" above. > Maybe it's because I'm old enough to have be brought up with the rule of respecting elders... Jono's not my elder. > ...and such that I give respect to people until they show they don't deserve it. People? Yes. Companies? No. Jono is a representative for Canonical. He has to demonstrate to me that he's not representing Canonical before he gets that benefit of a doubt. > Rather than acting like a modern day child and not respecting anyone unless I think they fit my view of deserving it. Since you were taught that they did deserve it, you're doing exactly the same thing, respecting only those you think fit your view of deserving it. Seriously people, I haven't read the web page, and I don't really care what it says. Canonical and Jono's views on most things are completely irrelevant to me. But how obvious does it have to be? Jono represents Canonical. Canonical is a company, not a person. You can't believe what companies tell you. All companies, not just Canonical. Google, IBM, Dell, Microsoft, GE, you name it. They all lie, all the time. It's in their nature. That's all that's going on here. I currently work for Consol Energy. Even though I'm not a manager or a representative of the company, there's no way I'm going to expect anyone to take anything I say about Consol, Consol's competitors, or the oil/gas industry at face value. It would be completely unreasonable of me. Why is anyone surprised Jono gets the same treatment? |
| dinotrac Nov 18, 2010 8:22 AM EDT |
TC - Grand to see that the EPA (Endless Pointless Arguments) live on. |
| cabreh Nov 18, 2010 9:01 AM EDT |
@jdixon and @dinotrac I was saying that we should be respecting others more. Now maybe you don't think that's worthwhile, I don't know. But I guess you then deserve the same treatment from others. It is only my opinion but it seems like the point of the web site Jono set up was to respond to the many people who seem to always be attacking anything Ubuntu these days. I don't like some of the changes coming (don't know about Wayland yet, maybe it'll beat the socks off X and I'll like RedHats effort) but I see no reason to be so negative all the time. But if you're going to complain about Ubuntu wanting to use Wayland in the furture, please attack RedHat/Fedora for providing it. One of the biggest annoyances to me is the inevitable comment to any Ubuntu related article stating that the distribution the commenter uses is so much better than Ubuntu. And the point of that is? Because it may very well NOT be better for the person writing the Ubuntu article. My take is if you really think Canonical (Ubuntu) is evil or something then vote by not using it. Let those who want to use it do so unmolested. I promise I won't diz your choice of distribution. Please afford me, and the many Ubuntu users who actually are happy to have that distribution, the same courtesy. This was my main point. You may think it's pointless. I and others do not. |
| dinotrac Nov 18, 2010 9:40 AM EDT |
@cabreh - Get over yourself, pal. Take a deep breath. Get somebody you love and have a nice coffee drink at a busy little coffee shop where the comings and goings of the customers fade into a nice background blur. To quote myself from another posting on this article, though not in this thread: Yeah... Mighty controversial, that respect stuff. I can almost picture all of the parties standing around the comic book store and grousing to Sheldon, Leonard, and the gang. So far as I can tell the story -- a story even the Big Bang writers might not believe -- goes like this: 1. Blogger puts up blog about how much nicer things are when people in a community treat each other with civility and respect. 2. Blogger names no names, writes nothing untoward about any individual, group, or even Linux distribution. 3. Others, deeply wounded by the idea that an individual would put a blog on the internet without their permission, attempt to externalize their internal self-destruct sequences. Yup. Here's the key piece of information for me: Aaron Seigo doesn't like it. Must be OK. |
| gus3 Nov 18, 2010 12:32 PM EDT |
"No good reason to believe" does not automatically translate into "lying". Anyone who's done time in jail or prison knows what I mean. |
| dinotrac Nov 18, 2010 12:42 PM EDT |
@gus3 - You realize that your wording makes it nearly impossible (for a variety of reasons) to chime in and say, "Yup!" |
| TxtEdMacs Nov 18, 2010 12:50 PM EDT |
Quoting: [...] Anyone who's done time in jail or prison knows what I mean.Breaking News!!! Another Exposé of the August Gus III Will Appear Shortly. More News at 10. |
| dinotrac Nov 18, 2010 1:01 PM EDT |
A question for the CSS gurus: What is the correct syntax for the clangsTinCupAgainstBars attribute? |
| cabreh Nov 18, 2010 2:55 PM EDT |
Hey nice one dinotrac. Lets go to personal attacks. That's always a good argument. OK, I'm ending with this post. To be on target here's a generalization: All people who write articles or editorials on the web twist the truth and use sensational headlines because they are all just prostituting themselves to get page hits. Now that would be a ridiculous statement that would apply to several of the posters here who are making the same kind of generalization regarding people employed in the Marketing/PR groups of any organization. To say anything they say in public has to be hard to believe because of their jobs. Well, even if some of you have perhaps once in your life written such an article doesn't mean I would assume all your articles are like that. But, I can see it's unlikely that most of you will even see how alike those two generalizations are. Just continue pidgin holing people. BTW, I do NOT work in Marketing or PR. I'm in IT/IS. |
| dinotrac Nov 18, 2010 5:19 PM EDT |
@cabreh: Personal attacks? You have got to be kidding me. Don't know, but when you include me as a target in one of your posts for no reason that I can comprehend, I think you need to step back and take a deep breath. Face it, pal, I had exactly one post in the entire thread, and it was aimed at the lovely and vivacious TuxChick, and made absolutely no reference to the topic under discussion. |
| tuxchick Nov 18, 2010 7:04 PM EDT |
Quoting: I had exactly one post in the entire thread, and it was aimed at the lovely and vivacious TuxChick, and made absolutely no reference to the topic under discussion. Darn you Dino, there you go picking on me again... oh wait. Just like I was saying the other day, I sure do miss Dino's sagacious, informed take on topics. |
| jdixon Nov 18, 2010 7:22 PM EDT |
> I was saying that we should be respecting others more. Why? Is unearned respect really a virtue? And I'm not showing any lack of resect for Jono. I'm not even discussing what he said, as I haven't read it. I'm discussing how others are reacting to what he said, and why they're doing so. > But I guess you then deserve the same treatment from others. It's the treatment I both expect and normally get. In most of life, respect is something you earn, not something you're granted. > ...but I see no reason to be so negative all the time. There will always be people who are negative. Sometimes they even have good reasons for it. > But if you're going to complain about Ubuntu wanting to use Wayland... I haven't complained about Ubuntu using Wayland. I've noted that the way they've decided to do so is not particularly community friendly, and contrasted it with the way at least one other distro would have done it. > One of the biggest annoyances to me is the inevitable comment to any Ubuntu related article stating that the distribution the commenter uses is so much better than Ubuntu. As I noted before, this always happens. It was true for Red Hat before Ubuntu came along. It will always be true for the most popular distro. And isn't this exactly the way Windows users feel about Linux? > My take is if you really think Canonical (Ubuntu) is evil or something then vote by not using it. First, Canonical is a company. As such it can be neither good nor evil. It can do enormous good or evil, but of itself it is neither. Secondly, I don't use Ubuntu as my distro of choice (though it is on one machine I own, since that machine came with it installed). > Let those who want to use it do so unmolested. Believe it or not, no one here is molesting Ubuntu users (that assumes that none of our posters are currently working for the TSA, of course). Disagreements, even strong ones, don't keep anyone from using the distro of their choice. And the person who appears to have the strongest opinion on the matter uses Ubuntu herself. > I promise I won't diz your choice of distribution. I thought pretty much everyone liked diz'ing Slackware. :) |
| azerthoth Nov 18, 2010 7:45 PM EDT |
I declare "Mortal Combat" *plays funky techno fight music* |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!