[Pan-users] Re: [OT] Software politics (was Re: Re: Questions about the next release)

[Duncan]

Ron Johnson posted on Sat, 13 Nov 2010 17:54:16 -0600 as excerpted:

> On 11/13/2010 11:08 AM, Duncan wrote:
>> Steve Davies posted on Sat, 13 Nov 2010 09:40:07 +0000 as excerpted:
>>
>>> I particularly like the Servantware references...
>>
>> FWIW, I've been thinking, on and off, that I need to figure out some
>> reasonable way to explain that such references are a reflection of my
>> own
>> ethics and value system and that I believe just as strongly that
>> attempting to force them on other users (the servantware masters
>> deserve what they'd get, after all, they're disrespecting my rights at
>> least as much as they expect me not to disrespect their rights to
>> assert control over stuff they wrote... obviously something they don't
>> have to particularly worry about, since I'd be unlikely to run it
>> anyway given the
>> practical issues of trying to run blackbox software I don't trust the
>> ethics of the creators of) not ready to voluntarily choose them would
>> as equally strongly betray those same values.
>>
>> It's gotta be a personal choice.
>>
>>
> Your uber-earnest Marx-like writing style (dude, that 11 line
> "paragraph" is ONE SENTENCE!) and use of emotionally-laded words like
> "servantware" belie your assertion that we all should make our own
> choices.

Eh, used to use "slaveryware", but servantware is arguably more accurate 
in some ways, and equally jibs with the sig quote, tho it's entirely 
possible to choose to be (or to continue to be) a slave as well.

And take out the parenthetical and that sentence isn't unreasonable at 
all.  Yeah, the parenthetical makes it a bit unwieldy, but that sort of 
thing happens when one is dealing with topics at some depth and 
complexity, as I was above.  If I'd been targeting something a bit more 
formal, I'd have made a footnote out of that, but the parenthetical I 
actually used was good enough, given the list/group informality context.

As to writing style in general, I'm aware that some people find mine 
"overly verbose", something they get to thank all those stupid writing 
assignments that call for two pages worth of content when two sentences 
(or two words) would convey the sum total of what I have to say on the 
subject.  It seems I learned that (repeated) lesson quite well. =:^\

Those folks are free to skim or skip my posts, or even filter/score them 
so they don't even see them.  (I hold the right to filter/score to rank 
equal to that of the right to speak one's mind on a topic -- I can speak 
my mind, but you can equally filter me out, and the reverse as well.  The 
two balance each other out.)  After all, it's not as if I nym-shift to 
avoid it.

Meanwhile, I've long since lost count of the number of folks who have 
thanked me for taking the time to explain as I do.  I know for a fact that 
there's many here that have.  I also know for a fact that there's a non-
zero number of folks (including on this list/group) that save my posts for 
later reference and rereading, because they find the info within of 
practical enough value to do so.

Plus, there's at least one bonus in my style for the folks that prefer to 
avoid my posts... the fact that they're so long and detailed means I put 
more time into each one, thus there's less of them to avoid than there'd 
be otherwise! =:^)

As for Marx, I've never read anything of his, but I'd find it quite 
flattering to have my style compared to that of, say, Paul, the writer of 
all those Greek Epistles in the Christian Bible. The complexity of his 
writing style and the way he examines a subject from all these different 
angles, driving home his point again and again in slightly different ways, 
is absolutely fascinating to me.  Far be it from me to say I've anything 
like his mastery of that style, but I'd be honored indeed to have someone 
compare my writing to his, even if the result is that mine is called quite 
inferior (since that's pretty much what I just said, above, myself).  But 
should the styles be found similar enough to call his style to mind, I'd 
definitely have no objection to that at all! =:^)

And finally, if someone wishes my answer to a question, great, I'll try to 
answer it to the best of my ability, likely examining multiple angles and 
caveats in my usual multi-faceted style that some find so irritating but 
others find so helpful.  But if I'm going to do it, it'll come out my 
way.  Which means if you post in HTML or top post and I reply, along with 
the answer to your question, you'll almost certainly get my request to 
avoid that behavior in the future.  (Whether you then do so is of course 
up to you, but it /is/ true that many of the group/list veterans likely to 
be of the most help, at least on many lists/groups, are also less likely 
to bother with replies to HTML or if the responses are top-posted, or at 
minimum. lecture you for doing so along with their reply.)  Similarly if a 
thread pertains to servantware; if I reply to such a thread, at least one 
reply is likely to explain my views on it and why I thus don't have as 
direct an experience with it as I did a decade or so ago.  Often, I'll try 
to stay out of such threads and let someone with more apropos experience 
answer, but if there's additional info on the problem at hand that I 
believe might be helpful, that hasn't been posted, I'll often post it, but 
of course when I do, along with that comes the explanation, etc.

And I certainly don't apologize for calling things as I see 'em.  You may 
in fact see 'em quite differently and that's indeed your right, but if I 
see someone failing to consider the rights I assert as natural human 
rights to share what one happens to be happy with, with their friends and 
others they may come in contact with, or deliberate restrictions on one's 
right to creatively build on knowledge and creativity that has come before 
and to distribute the results, well, I'll call it as I see it.  You're 
certainly free to disagree and to explain your side as well, or to simply 
arrange to not see my posts if you find my viewpoints and/or style 
offensive, your call, but meanwhile, my replies are going to have my 
viewpoint and style as part of the package, and that I'm not going to 
apologize for, nor do I see any need or reason to do so.  OTOH, should it 
at some point become plain that my posts are no longer of benefit to the 
group/list, well, there's way more lists/groups and requests for help on 
them than I have time for already, so I'll simply pickup and find another 
one, because if my posts are no longer of help, then I've no longer a 
reason to post to the group/list (with the possible exception of asking a 
question of my own from time to time, of course).

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman