[Seaside] A new critical blog discussing Seaside
siguctua at gmail.com
Sat Apr 18 02:43:08 UTC 2009
2009/4/18 Keith Hodges <keith_hodges at yahoo.co.uk>:
> Sebastian Sastre wrote:
>> It will be easier for your ideas to be listened if put more effort in taking
>> away bad emotions. Enphasis with a bit of drama could be ok to illustrate but
>> nobody will have time to deal with your anger. Some things you wrote there do
>> have sense so just manage to comunicate that in a positive way and see what
>> happens. I don't mean less negative I mean positive. Otherwise you'll just help
>> polluting the seaside ecosystem instead of making a better place. In short:
>> after reading that I feel you are with focus in war instead of focusing in
>> And you did it annonymously, which leaves your ideas in a weaker position. What
>> did you pretend with that? to create the annonymous seaside critic comunity?
>> leaded by whom?
>> don't misundertand me: I consider good critics as precious
> One of my fields of interest is emotional abuse.
> When a person who points out a problem raises an issue, if the response
> is to say that "the problem is theirs, that they have a problem", this
> is abusive. So Lukas, calling him a "troll", is actually abusive. If you
> want references to this principle I can provide them.
> Mr Cucumber is raising issues. We need to identify the actual issues and
> see if they need addressing. Turning around and shooting the messenger
> is frequently used as the first line of defence so as not to actually
> engage with any of the issues raised.
> Secondly anger is a truth based emotion, it carries a valuable message,
> unlike lie based emotions. Personally I dont see much anger in his blog,
> I see honesty as expressed from his perception. In fact there is far
> less anger expressed here than I would expect. I know I have been there,
> and I am sorry to say that I agreed with most of the points raised, with
> a couple of reservations.
> I have had little or no contact with the 2.9 team, so I suspect/hope
> that some of his criticisms may be over a year out of date.
> Secondly I have come to the concusion that some of what might be
> interpreted as arrogance is cultural. For example when handing out food
> to the homeless, I always found that some foreigners would snatch the
> food and scoff it without a word of a thank you. This to a conservative
> English lad at the time was extremely rude. However a number of years
> later I learned that for some cultures, the "thank you" IS the eagerness
> to eat what is given.
> It appears to me that Lukas, Phillippe and others, put defending the
> code base first, rather than engaging with the person. This is the
> cultural distinction, engineering vs human relations. These are two
> separate fields, it is when they mix that we get problems. For human
> relations we need a framework for harnessing peoples ideas and
> contributions somewhere for them to go, some communication and assurance
> that their work however small or incomplete is considered valuable. We
> need some form of buffer between the enthusiasm of contributors and the
> code base. By establishing their bar of engineering excellence over the
> code base, this is then mistaken for arrogance in the the human
> relations field. Any contribution that cannot be expressed as a perfect
> code contribution that applies to the existing code base is summarily
> dismissed without comment. The result being that the enthusiam of
> potential contributors is turned to exactly the opposite.
> This is a valid issue which I am grateful to Mr Cucumber for raising,
> because it happens to me frequently and as a result I made a conscious
> decision not to bother even considering contributing back to the seaside
> core again. For the same reason I will not contribute to Pharo, and I
> think at least three times before I make any commit to Pier/Magritte.
> For example, I have written a library which extends Magritte to support
> Scriptaculous, so that fields may dynamically depend upon each other. So
> my Magritte-Scriptaculous library has been sitting there for a long
> time. I do wonder whether Lukas has ever looked at it, I know for
> certain he has never contributed towards it. I have no idea of the value
> of my contribution, I have no idea whether anyone is using it, and get
> very little feedback as to whether it is any good or not. In short there
> is no suggestion or clue available as to whether this contribution of my
> time and effort is actually valuable to the community or not. It sits in
> a contributions void, and gives no signals that would encourage me to
> make further contributions. If at some point Lukas decides that he wants
> dynamic support added to Magritte, I now fully expect him to write his
> own, without even referring to mine. Is that arrogance? I don't know any
> more, I have raised this issue ad infinitum on the Pharo list, and they
> don't seem to think so.
> If you make a contribution to Beach any contribution, I dont care how
> small, how badly coded, how lacking in tests it is. I view your input as
> valuable, and I welcome you to the team. I will join you in making your
> work something of worth to the Beach community. I believe that there is
> another way.
> p.s. The issue of his being anonymous is also irrelevant to any actual
> issues raised. There are many very good reasons for remaining anonymous
> on the internet. When I find emails I have written dating back 15 years,
> it makes me wish I was a bit more anonymous myself.
Keith, you have some valid points and i think Seaside team should look
for the ways how to fix them.
But Mr.Cucumber style of expressing his point in few words can be
"you are an idiots and i will tell you why".
Will you continue to listen for a man's arguments, when he saying like that?
If you do, then you automatically consider yourself an idiot. Right?
> seaside mailing list
> seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
More information about the seaside