GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 21, 2012 19:30 UTC (Wed) by Zizzle (guest, #67739)
In reply to: GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode by ebassi
Parent article: GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Yes, please think of the brand!

The precious GNOME brand. It's not important that users do what they want, we need to maintain the brand!

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 21, 2012 19:41 UTC (Wed) by ovitters (guest, #27950) [Link] (19 responses)

Seems you're just out to troll. Unfortunately that behaviour is totally acceptable on LWN :-(

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 21, 2012 20:01 UTC (Wed) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link] (7 responses)

> Unfortunately that behaviour is totally acceptable on LWN :-(

Which is better than the alternative.

I find quite a lot of what I read on the Internet (including most of your posts) not worth reading in hindsight, but I value freedom of speech, so I'm willing to put up with it.

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 21, 2012 20:15 UTC (Wed) by ovitters (guest, #27950) [Link] (4 responses)

Freedom of speech seems like a popular excuse to be rude.

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 21, 2012 20:29 UTC (Wed) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link] (3 responses)

Sorry if I seemed rude, but I stand by my position. Trolling, flaming, petty bickering, banality, etc. are all undesirable, but not as bad as censorship. I refuse to retire quietly into some sort of Internet dhimmitude.

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 21, 2012 20:37 UTC (Wed) by ovitters (guest, #27950) [Link] (2 responses)

I didn't meant to imply you were rude, just adding my bits to what you mentioned about comments on LWN.

There was nothing that could be rude as the only thing you said is that you don't find most of my post worth reading. In my impression I think I have more or less the same discussion, usually with the same people in pretty much every LWN article. It gets to the point that even if I am just interested in something other than GNOME, it turns in the same discussion anyway. I sometimes wonder if the repeating the same discussion is not against the spirit of the GNOME Code of Conduct ("try to be concise", see https://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct).

Saying "not worth reading in hindsight": I actually wondered why only in hindsight ;)

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 22, 2012 3:37 UTC (Thu) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link] (1 responses)

> Saying "not worth reading in hindsight": I actually wondered why only in hindsight ;)

I'm not really sure what you mean by this, but if you mean "why do I read things that I think I might disagree with," it's because I've learned things from people with whom I disagree with on almost everything. I admit not often, but it has happened.

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 22, 2012 8:21 UTC (Thu) by ovitters (guest, #27950) [Link]

I meant that as I often have similar discussions, you can pretty much predict what the will be in the comment if you see my name.

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 21, 2012 21:45 UTC (Wed) by AndreE (guest, #60148) [Link]

You are free to go to other sites and participate in such non-constructive discussions with antagonistic tones.

And communities are free to enforce standards of discourse to encourage the sort of participation they like.

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 21, 2012 22:16 UTC (Wed) by Company (guest, #57006) [Link]

I value censorship over freedom of speech for a lot of things. It is surely important to give people a chance to voice their opinion _somewhere_, but not everywhere.

This is why I value moderated places like GNOME IRC channels or mailing lists over Facebook or Twitter for GNOME development discussion or Google News over Tumblr.

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 21, 2012 21:01 UTC (Wed) by Zizzle (guest, #67739) [Link]

Sure anyone who says anything you don't like or agree with is a troll.

This guy must be the ultimate troll in your eyes.

http://igurublog.wordpress.com/2012/11/05/gnome-et-al-rot...

"The point is that it decreases our brand presence. We’ve always argued that if it is anything, GNOME is a UX. There might be a case for letting people tweak things here and there, but I really think that every GNOME install should have the same core look and feel. Otherwise, what is it that we are doing in the first place?" -- Allan Day

"Let’s say that we are trying to define either a product or a product platform. I don’t think it is possible to do this without some “brand” coherence." -- William Jon McCann

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 22, 2012 5:23 UTC (Thu) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link] (9 responses)

Add users you don't want to see in your account's filters. Very nice kwn feature for GNOME 3 threads. :-)

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 22, 2012 5:24 UTC (Thu) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]

Lwn, not kwn. Tablet Keyboards still too small for my fat fingers. :-)

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 22, 2012 8:25 UTC (Thu) by ovitters (guest, #27950) [Link] (7 responses)

I'm used to having the access to filter for all. In any case, that is unwanted, you cannot participate and moderate/filter at the same time, that is not going to work (bias&conflict).

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 22, 2012 12:18 UTC (Thu) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link] (6 responses)

I don't have any clue about what you just said.

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 22, 2012 13:18 UTC (Thu) by ovitters (guest, #27950) [Link] (5 responses)

On GNOME mailing lists I can filter for all. I don't have nor want that access on LWN. At the same time, I do not like filtering for just myself.

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 22, 2012 15:09 UTC (Thu) by clump (subscriber, #27801) [Link] (2 responses)

Well, I'm happy that you post on LWN and I'm happy I've had a chance to exchange ideas with you. On topic, I'm very excited to see what a classic mode will do. I use fallback mode currently because I have a more GNOME 2-ish workflow, and my gma500-based video card makes anything but basic video operations painful.

I do wish comments on these articles would stay away from hyperbole. Every time GNOME is mentioned people immediately jump to making assumptions about people and intent. There are gifted coders and contributors on LWN. Surely the time would be better spent contributing.

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 22, 2012 16:03 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] (1 responses)

To be fair, if your desires fall outside some cloudy concept known as "the Gnome Brand," there's little chance your patches will be accepted. It's a big risk. All the recent turmoil has shown that this very uncertainty can make forking seem desirable!

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 22, 2012 20:49 UTC (Thu) by clump (subscriber, #27801) [Link]

There are the MATE and Cinnamon forks, both with a bit of a different focus. To your point, I'm not aware of a fork of GNOME 3 that includes patches/changes that have been rejected from GNOME 3. There are enterprising individuals on this site, maybe they'd take up the torch?

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 22, 2012 20:14 UTC (Thu) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link] (1 responses)

> I do not like filtering for just myself.

So don't filter posts with your account? Personally, it helps me deal with stressful persons who're likely to just draw me into yet another unproductive debate.

The "Someone is Wrong on the Internet" thing. It makes life suck just a bit less.

GNOME Shell to support a "classic" mode

Posted Nov 22, 2012 20:47 UTC (Thu) by ovitters (guest, #27950) [Link]

I'm terrible at coding so for me the time wasting doesn't matter that much. Staying up to date is pretty useful for e.g. GNOME release team (for me a large share of that involves noticing what is happening... be it GNOME, some distro, feedback, etc).