| |||||||||||||
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus]McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus]Posted Aug 6, 2012 10:31 UTC (Mon) by sorpigal (subscriber, #36106)In reply to: McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] by cladisch Parent article: McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus]
> It was a direct response to "Is there anybody here that stops and thinks whether everything that Jon McCann thinks up is a good idea?"
Sounds like a purely technical question, to me. Would it have been somehow less offensive if he had rephrased to omit mention of the name of the person who thought up the idea that lead to the technically horrible change?
Try this on for size: "Is there anybody whose responsibility it is to review whether the changes recommended by designers are good for the application?" Is that better? Although I can't see the value in not naming the person, I suppose this sounds more politically correct.
(Log in to post comments)
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 6, 2012 16:57 UTC (Mon) by Company (guest, #57006) [Link]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
Both the original question and your rephrasing qualify as that. One uses the name, the other uses "the designers".
The correct question would be:
And that sounds very much like a rhetorical question to me.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 6, 2012 17:45 UTC (Mon) by nye (guest, #51576) [Link]
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
> Both the original question and your rephrasing qualify as that.
Posting a link that refutes your own claim is a pretty poor show if you're trying to get others to share your opinion.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 7, 2012 0:11 UTC (Tue) by Company (guest, #57006) [Link]
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 7, 2012 10:35 UTC (Tue) by nye (guest, #51576) [Link]
Please come back once you have learned basic reading comprehension; you're embarrassing yourself.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 7, 2012 10:50 UTC (Tue) by slashdot (guest, #22014) [Link]
That's not an "ad hominem" attack, it's a question about how the GNOME development organization works.
Although a more pertinent question would be "is there anyone outside the GNOME clique that checks whether the maintainers of GNOME applications do a good job?"
And that's indeed rhetorical, since clearly there's no one checking.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 7, 2012 23:32 UTC (Tue) by Company (guest, #57006) [Link]
It's an ad hominem because it explicitly mentions Jon McCann after pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of him (namely: All your whining i this whole thread). Granted, it's somewhat more complicated than the usual your mom jokes.
Also, there are various instances outside of GNOME that check whether the maintainers of GNOME applications do a good job. In fact, you are doing that in this thread. It's a side effect of open development.
What you're really after is this: Who is doing anything when GNOME developers mess up?
And that is happening. Those people enjoy Unity, KDE and XFCE. At least if you believe what they're writing everywhere.
|
|||||||||||||