Re: Kickstarter was not successful... but it did help things...

[Doc O'Leary]

In article <mailman.10118.1387787201.10748.discuss-gnustep@gnu.org>,
 Richard Frith-Macdonald <richardfrithmacdonald@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 22 Dec 2013, at 17:36, Doc O'Leary <droleary@7usenet2013.subsume.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> > In article <mailman.9862.1387588676.10748.discuss-gnustep@gnu.org>,
> > Germán Arias <germanandre@gmx.es> wrote:
> > 
> >>> Again with the stupid rush to implement things . . .
> >> 
> >> Remember that, in general, write free software is a hobby. Just to see
> >> what happens.
> > 
> > That's no reason to abandon science.
> 
> This refrain seems to be a troll ...

My greatest crime here is that I'm being brutally honest.  And it 
wouldn't be all that brutal if people simply listened.  If I've been 
repeating myself enough to seem trollish, that's the reason.

> the person seeming to abandon science 
> here is YOU.  You keep talking about how people are being unscientific and 
> how you are scientific, but have presented nothing to support that idea, 
> giving the appearance that you believe that being 'scientific' means agreeing 
> with you.

You do know that *is* the way of science, right?  There is evidence, and 
I respect that reality in stating my position, so it is not enough to 
simply disagree with me.  If I am wrong, show me my mistake and I will 
fix it.

> Take for instance your false assertion that the GNUstep project is hostile to 
> OSX users.  A better (ie generally tried, tested, proven more efficient) than 
> the negative approach would have been to take note of the preponderance of 
> evidence that it's osx friendly, and propose ways of making it even 
> friendlier.  Buried in this thread is the suggestion that OSX users find it 
> hard to get started;  it's a good point.
> Perhaps we should have a prominent bit on the website saying that OSX users 
> can most easily use gnustep for cross-platform development by installing a 
> virtual machine on their OSX system ... this is so obvious to us old-timers 
> that we don't notice that it might need to be stated.  To make it easier we 
> might supply a VM image, eg debian,  for a freely available virtualisation 
> engine that works on OSX (perhaps you have the skills to provide that?).

This is amusing, because you start with saying my assertion (actually a 
conclusion for me) is false, and then you go on to demonstrate that it 
is, in fact, true!  Again, you'd do well to *start* with the evidence, 
as I have, to work out the conclusion.  But do go on pretending that I 
am the one who has abandoned science.

> You have raised a few good points, in this discussion, and while it's true 
> that they've all been discussed before, that doesn't mean that re-raising 
> them is not worthwhile.  You have ideas to offer, so why not offer them in a 
> spirit of positive criticism?

I do.  The negativity, with great irony, is entirely brought in by those 
who demand positivity.  And so, over time, things stagnate and have 
become toxic.  I *am* the one pushing for positive change, and the 
push-back I get in return is incredibly sad.

> There's a fairly clear statement of what GNUstep is (implied goal) on the 
> website (the overview at the top of the home page and the first link from the 
> page!), yet you keep saying there needs to be discussion and agreement on a 
> goal.

Indeed.  As I have said, what exists now is dated and unhelpful.  There 
seem to be no use cases behind the design, and no measure of conversion.  
It seems there is widespread acknowledgement that it is a known problem.  
What I'm *not* seeing is any desire to address it.

> Possibly you didn't read it, possibly you did but are trolling, but I guess 
> most likely you just don't like that statement.  That's legitimate enough 
> (I'm no longer sure I like it myself), so you could seek to point out the 
> advantages of modifying/improving that in some way.  Surely that would be 
> more effective than saying there is no goal.

All evidence points to a different conclusion.

> In general, providing positive criticism has been scientifically proven to 
> work best (natural psychological resistance means that an attempt at neutral 
> is effectively negative).
> 
> Go on, you know you can be scientific ... embrace a positive attitude :-)

Again, I have.  I did not receive a positive response.  The demonstrated 
best strategy for an iterated prisoner's dilemma is tit-for-tat.  The 
cycle will be broken when someone inside GNUstep wises up and moves in a 
positive direction.

-- 
iPhone apps that matter:    http://appstore.subsume.com/
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, localhost, googlegroups.com, theremailer.net,
    and probably your server, too.