User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Ubuntu bug #1 closed

Ubuntu bug #1 closed

Posted Jun 4, 2013 18:36 UTC (Tue) by hummassa (subscriber, #307)
In reply to: Ubuntu bug #1 closed by nye
Parent article: Ubuntu bug #1 closed

> your comment was offensive, obnoxious, and wrong

Ok. First of all, your "go back to youtube" was as offensive, obnoxious and wrong to me as my "khim does not know what he's talking about" was to you. Maybe more, as it is factually wrong (I never youtube-commented, neither on youtube nor here), really offensive (it translated as "you are puerile and your motivations are evil and/or stupid", something that does not correspond to the way I behave myself online but ESPECIALLY on LWN) and extremely obnoxious (as you wouldn't indignfy yourself telling me what was that I wrote that offended/bothered you and why am I factually wrong).

Moreso, khim *is* factually wrong in lots of thing he says in this thread, for instance: it's his point of view that package management tools (in his parlance "RPM/APT") somehow magically cause people to want to introduce ABI incompatibilities and that Windows DLL hell is a good solution.

He is especially wrong when he rants:

>> Not with RPM/APT per se, no. But the attitude of RPM/APT users (distribution packers) when they are confronted with the need to keep bazillion old libraries and kludges needed to keep backward compatibility? Absolutely no for bundled libraries! Old, obsolete versions are not acceptable! Kill them! Kill them with fire! Conicidently this attitude also kills all the chances for the third-party developers support and thus mainstream acceptance.

Because there is nothing in any distribution I ever used that precludes the usage of older versions of APIs, especially alongside new ones. That is why, in my comment, I said (informatively IMHO) that I use Qt[345] applications as seamlessly as possible.

> there is no point in anyone arguing with you since there's no chance you'll ever change your mind

There are actually lots of documented occasions, especially here on LWN, where I was wrong and I conceded that I was wrong, and where I changed my mind after someone took its time to argue their views with me. So, I am pretty sure there would be a point in it, if you were so inclined.

One example would be: https://lwn.net/Articles/529887/ -- where I ended with "so I stand corrected!".

On that note, I stand corrected of my "nye does not exist" comment, because, in the process of looking better for examples on LWN, I found you -- and some very amiable interchanges between you and me here on LWN. Which, obviously, add to my confusion relative to your irritation with me.

> This is the stereotype of a Youtube comment, and it's a textbook example of why I don't consider LWN worth paying for (ie. the comments significantly detract from the value of the site)

This phrase gives me the impression that you are reading different comments that I am reading, or at least that you are reading them differently. Yes, it is annoying when some LWN users go commenting on an "opposite side" article (e.g., {Gtk,Gnome,Apache OpenOffice,Emacs,Btrfs}-people ranting on unrelated-to-them {Qt,KDE,LibreOffice,Vim,Zfs}-related news "wow, mine is better!"). But these are a minority, and easily avoidable IMHO.

In any case, I reviewd my thirty or so last comments, and I think I behave reasonably well (*), so, my conscience is clean.

(*) I think jake (or would it be corbet?) gave me a hard time for a comment some days ago, but I can't seem to find it, and I distinctly remember apologizing for it.


(Log in to post comments)


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds