2009/6/29 Igor Stasenko <siguctua at gmail.com>:
> I agree that developers (or committers) should gain some sort of
> immunity from critics by anyone else, who is not committing.
> But making separate list will not help i think. We already have many of them.

Those who are not criticized are not working with anyone else. The
moment the community cannot openly criticize Squeak is the moment
Squeak becomes a dictatorship. Squeak is already living in a bubble
and it's not necessary to create another one. The Squeak Oversight
Board has to listen to those critics and decide what to do with them.
Not every critics are meaningless... because what? The person who has
submitted the critic did not contribute? I'll tell you what... to
critic is to contribute. Those who choose to shut up don't do anything
for Squeak.

Now, the community can rightfully expect the critic to go beyond "it's
not good", "I don't like this or that" and so on. It's important to
voice our opinions, ideas, etc. and, more importantly, the reasons
behind them. If someone does not pour efforts into doing actual
contribution, we can at least expect those to make an effort to
express properly their idea. Talking is one step toward common
understanding. Anyway, regardless of the critics, those who actively
contribute to Squeak should have a meaningful voice.

Ian.

-- 
http://mecenia.blogspot.com/