Not so abusive

Posted Feb 26, 2004 22:20 UTC (Thu) by dang (guest, #310)
In reply to: Hmm by Ross
Parent article: The Luxury of Ignorance: An Open-Source Horror Story (catb.org)

I don't think that he is being abusive at all. The piece reflects the very real frustration that users feel when confronted with UI and doco that are broken.

And his point is well taken. For most users, usability is real measure of success.

Really?

Posted Feb 26, 2004 23:07 UTC (Thu) by Ross (guest, #4065) [Link] (5 responses)

He calls the CUPS developers idiots and has nothing nice to say about
them (other than he likes the design of the network-based autodiscovery).

My point was that he's placing blame on them when the software might have
been reconfigured by the distributor without changing the documentation.

Really?

Posted Feb 27, 2004 21:49 UTC (Fri) by ren_123 (guest, #19852) [Link] (4 responses)

>He calls the CUPS developers idiots and has nothing nice to say about
them

Oooooh, the typical luserish behavior of 'I only listen to your
complaints if you give me a pet on the back'. That's almost comparable to
chantage.

Do you also start with positive, constructive comments if somebody knocks
your teeth out?

Really?

Posted Feb 28, 2004 0:41 UTC (Sat) by piman (guest, #8957) [Link]

Eric would have grounds to criticize the CUPS developers' technical abilities, had he implemented (or substantially designed) a printing system himself, or a GUI interface to CUPS.

Instead, he coded... Fetchmail. Which is, to be honest, not that great a piece of code (though it does work). But its configuration UI, Fetchmailconf, is one of the worst UIs I have ever used in any operating system. Ever.

Really?

Posted Feb 28, 2004 8:46 UTC (Sat) by Ross (guest, #4065) [Link] (2 responses)

I'm not sure if you are just trolling, but assuming not there are
several differences you seem to have missed.

1) The CUPS developers didn't knock his teeth out. They committed the
horrible act of giving him a free (in both senses) printing system
based on current Internet standards. If that's such a horrible
crime I wouldn't like to see what you'd call the kernel developers.

2) I'm not speaking for the CUPS developers so I have no idea if they
will listen to his rant or not. And either way my point, which was
that the rant was not very constructive, stands.

3) Yes, in fact being polite tends to get you better results because
you avoid pushing the other side to dig in their heels.

4) He's bitching about the wrong people anyway since they didn't create
the stupid GUI he spends the most words ripping on.

5) He shouldn't be one to complain about user interfaces unless he's
willing to clean up his own.

6) If he really wanted to get it fixed he would have submitted a bug
report with plenty of documentation, or, horror of horrors, a patch.
You know, that whole open source collaboration thing?

Really?

Posted Feb 28, 2004 11:55 UTC (Sat) by ren_123 (guest, #19852) [Link] (1 responses)

1) So, if it is free, you have no right to complain about it?

2) If you look at the first five reactions, at the top of this page, I
see some very good comments where UI designers can take advantage of.
Apart from that, his whole describtion of what things went wrong, and
what he did next, is certainly useful for UI designers.

3) yes, being polite does get you better results. However, if the other
party refuses to listen to valid complaints because they're 'not worded
properly' then it becomes a wordgame. You might expect such behavior big
bureaucratic companies, not from open source developers.

4) Ah, he's barking up the wrong tree, so we can ignore him.

5) And before we take his complaint serious, let him fix his own work.
That will teach him.

6) Yeah, raising the bar for complaints is also a good idea.

I'll bet that if you combine the above three points, most users will just
cave in, and pray that the next version has fixed their bugs
automagically. Ever googled for the 'clue train manifesto?'

That whole open source collaboration thing thrives on listening to your
users, and taking them serious.

Really?

Posted Feb 29, 2004 21:28 UTC (Sun) by Ross (guest, #4065) [Link]

1) Did I say that? I don't think so. What I said was that releasing
something free is not the same as kicking your users in the mouth. Sure
they can complain. I can complain about your post using invalid debate
tactics can't I. But if I said you're an idiot for the way you designed
the CUPS GUI you would probably not take me seriously. And if I failed to
understand why and said "just because your post was free doesn't mean I
don't have a right to complain about it" you should have the right to
laugh in my face.

2) Those reactions weren't written by ESR were they? I'm talking about
ESR's rant, not posts on LWN.

3) Did I say they weren't listening to complaints? Did I say they
shouldn't listen to complaints? I don't think so. What I am saying is
that it is a natural human tendency to react badly to people who call you
names -- especially when they ignore feedback channels and use their
notoriety to call you names in a public rant.

4) He's barking up the wrong tree so maybe he should bark up the right one.

5) I didn't say we should ignore his complaint because of this but he
probably should check his own work for the flaws he's complaining about
before lobbing such a rant to the public.

6) Once again you mischaracterize what I said. I said that he chose a
crappy way to approach fixing the problem if he really wanted to get it
fixed. I didn't say that user's complaints should be ignored if they are
not "properly worded" or fail to "meet the bar". But if someone like ESR
can't be bothered to complain in a productive way there is little hope for
decent user feedback in general. And it makes me wonder if he really
should be one of our "leaders".