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

[Tom Bruno]

Science research, especially when conveyed to the target audience requires more 
than just "because I say there is evidence".  You go on about how its science 
yet I've read this thread over and over and I can't pick out a single 
reference, scientific method, or any actual research from you. It is "because I 
say so".

I've read through the website and I don't have any question about the direction 
of GNUstep. What I'm hearing from you is that you don't want that to be the 
direction. I disagree completely, as my intent for using NS* and UI* in GNUstep 
matches the stated goals completely.  I don't care that you want UIkit to wrap 
NS*, I don't care that you think UI* and NS* are the same.  They are not the 
same and anyone with a solid background in architecture would understand there 
is more to the issue than API calls. Since you have not demonstrated any 
experience in architecture and propose a model of how things work that is 
contrary to my first person experience, Please forgive me if I don't take you 
at your word.

On Dec 24, 2013, at 2:49 PM, Doc O'Leary <droleary@7usenet2013.subsume.com> 
wrote:

>> Honest?  It's OK to be honestly mistaken, but when you ignore evidence, 
>> that's self deception.
> 
> Indeed.  So why are so few people here ignoring the evidence?  Why to 
> they deceive themselves into thinking that people who point out problems 
> *are* the problem?

I still can't figure out for the life of me what this evidence is. You keep 
ranting about it but never really present it.


> 
>>> You do know that *is* the way of science, right?
>> 
>> No, agreeing with you for no reason is called 'faith' ... pretty much the 
>> opposite of science.
> 

As stated above, pretty much everyone reading i.m.o. can't figure out what this 
evidence is. You've made a few good points, but even those points aren't backed 
by scientific research and are just repeated. If they are based on science then 
you are not demonstrating the methods to arrive at the conclusions to make your 
case believable. (A requirement of Science)


> I'm not asking them to agree with me.  In fact, I'm partly doing the 
> opposite.  Do you think I don't *know* that people don't like it when 
> you talk to them with brutal honesty?  I could *easily* use a nicer 
> voice to express my opinions here.

Opinions.

> 
> What do you expect me to show you that isn't available freely?  Do you 
> want the link to the failed Kickstarter proposal?
> 
> http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/203272607/gnustep-project
> 

Kickstarts fail because of a lot of reasons. You've chosen 1 to focus on and 
incorrectly. Most Kickstarters that are a success are a success because they 
have already earned an audience of individuals before the kickstarter. This 
pre-populated seed group are actually the ones that end up funding the project, 
viral kickstarters are the edge case. For a kickstarter success, its important 
to set Kickstarter goals within the bounds your already existing audience is 
able to meet which Gregory has already stated he did not do.  Using kickstarter 
as evidence that any specific characteristic of the project is the cause of 
kickstarter failure, is a failure to analyze and present the data in a fair and 
unbiased view. Infact, one could call the Kickstarter a huge success since it 
brought awareness and myself to GNUstep.  Not all kickstarter goals have to be 
for $.

Actual References:
http://www.thedominoproject.com/2012/06/why-kickstarter-campaigns-fail.html
http://www.wired.com/design/2012/06/kickstarter-fail/
http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/sometimes-kickstarter-projects-dont-make-it
https://www.gameacademy.com/blog/why-do-some-kickstarter-campaigns-fail/


> Do you doubt that the popularity of ObjC has skyrocketed in the last 5 
> years?
> 
> http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html
> 
> Do you want to see how little gnustep.org has been changing?
> 

Taking one unrelated statistic and trying to apply it to another topic is not 
evidence. Skyrocketing popularity does not reflect rate of change.  Infact, its 
the opposite in just as many cases. Much more popular companies and systems 
have had an extremely high rate of change and constant decreasing popularity.  
Objective-C itself has not really changed all that much in the last 5 years. In 
fact I was very surprised when I got GNUstep up and running just how complete 
it is!  ARC, Blocks, a basis in CoreAnimation, this is way more than I 
expected!  Fantastic work guys.

>> 
> 
> Part of my point is that, yes, such things are *said* on the web site 
> and elsewhere.  But if you actually sit down and think about it, if you 
> apply the use case "I'm a Mac developer looking to try porting to 
> GNUstep", the *full* body of evidence makes it obvious that GNUstep is 
> not very welcoming.
> 

I am a Mac developer and I've found them very welcoming.  Are you reading any 
other threads? These guys are awesome.  You want to see not very welcoming then 
go experience the Gnome project for a bit.  OSS require a small layer of thick 
skin and for what its worth I am very proud of how Gregory and others have 
treated you throughout this whole thread.  They've shown extreme restraint & 
that itself is evidence that this community is not only welcoming but very 
mature and open.

> 
> Again with the ignoring of obvious examples to the contrary.  Do you 
> actually bother to read things?
> 
>> Lots of people are doing useful stuff ... why not join in and contribute 
>> something?
> 
> Answered many times.  Please read before responding.
> 

You've wasted so many peoples time and have proven nothing about your skills, 
your research, your hypothesis, or your scientific method.  If you hadn't 
noticed, this is a software project not a religion. It takes more than talk and 
an uplifting speech to make progress in source code.  If you were the leader I 
wouldn't follow you, you've shown no experience of software development of any 
kind in this thread. Especially of OSS projects.  As far as your thoughts about 
"leadership" I disagree respectfully as my experience shows that Management can 
say anything, but the guy that knows how to code is the one that all the coders 
follow to get the job done.


>> I suggested putting together a VM to make it easier for people to get 
>> started 
>> ... is that not something you could do?
> 
> It indeed is.  But, again, what is the point in doing so if the 
> leadership doesn't actually place the *underlying reason* for providing 
> such a thing as a priority issue for the GNUstep project?

So what, you don't agree with leadership. Take control of your own life and 
destiny. Make it better. Just do it.  Your arguments are un-motivating, 
uninteresting, and are soaking up time which I could have used to make the vm 
image. Most of us are coders by profession and hobby. Most of us work without 
the big emotional leader figure inspiring us to move. We don't need it, we love 
the work so we do it.

 There is no profession where you get to say "I'm awesome" without proving it. 
Why you think we'd all just take you at your word is beyond me. You remind me 
of "that guy" who sits in every meeting and hijacks every code strategy talk so 
he can say later that he contributed even though he didn't write a line of 
code.  The coders would have succeeded at writing it a whole lot faster if 
"that guy" didn't keep extending the discussions to never ending points holding 
up progress. Perhaps some self reflection is in order after reading Dilbert?

>  Perhaps my 
> time is better spent on other things.  I'm trying to profile before I 
> optimize, which apparently makes me a jerkwad in this upside down world.

I agree, your time is better spent either helping or not wasting my time 
reading. Your points have been noted and are of public record thank you for 
what you have contributed.

 Brutal, Honest, and a Fact.