[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: More metaproblem

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: More metaproblem
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2014 14:35:59 +0200

> Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2014 06:35:57 -0500
> From: "Eric S. Raymond" <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden,
>       address@hidden
> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>:
> > I challenge you to ask and then post the results here, including
> > similar results for other Free Software projects.
> Wow.  You are truly a *master* of subtle obstructionism. The second
> clause in that sentence was a work of art, leaving you wiggle room to
> disregard any survey numbers I might to bring back on grounds of
> insufficient breadth of sample.

I didn't say anything about the sample size.  Please don't put words
in my mouth, I'm perfectly capable of expressing my intent myself.

All I asked for is to compare whatever level of dissatisfaction you
find on a feed which I never visit to something similar for other
projects.  I've seen enough talkback forums to know that the level of
flames there could be utterly unrelated to reality.

> And camouflaging this maneuver as an appeal to scientific
> objectivity - genius, sheer genius!
> Why, if I were a more naive person, I might have immediately gone
> beavering off to #emacs, collected several hundred expressions of
> frustration, and brought them back here only to have them
> high-handedly dismissed.

What's to prevent me from interpreting this as a camouflaged attempt
to get off your high horse, because you have no real data to back up
your claims?

> That general tactic of "I will disregard you until you put in
> an amount of work I have pre-defined to be effectively impossible",
> yes. An old favorite on this list, a hardy perennial.  Very effective
> for resisting any kind of innovation.

The tactic to invent non-existing intentions to your opponents and
then label those inventions with derogatory labels is also
well-known.  Not very effective here, but known.

> This is how Emacs dies.  Not with a bang, but with a whimper.

Emacs doesn't die.  Look at the commit rate, if you really want to do
an objective analysis.  Not many live projects can compare with what
we have.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]