Comment 328 for bug 668415

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Mark Shuttleworth
<email address hidden> wrote:
> if the feature was really that important, someone would have
> stepped up to do it *properly*.

"Properly" as defined by you. You set the bar wherever you want, and
if someone doesn't jump high enough, it's not good enough.

You want us to use your software, but when we tell you your software
isn't meeting our needs, you tell us to fix it ourselves. But then
when someone does so, you say that he didn't do it "properly." It
isn't hard to read between the lines here. Just be honest and admit
that you don't want the feature implemented.

> This is not about feeding you vague disinformation. This is about knowing clearly what we care about and
> devoting precious time and resources to that.

Indeed, it's "about" whatever you say it's "about," and anyone who
disagrees doesn't know what it's "about." An easy way to dismiss
others' opinions.

> It's not really possible to have a balanced conversation with anybody who has no
> appreciation for that.

So now it's not possible to have a "balanced" conversation with users.
 We couldn't possibly understand what you designers and developers and
testers are doing. Just because we actually use the end result of
your work doesn't mean we know anything about what it's like to use

> Do you think it's socially acceptable to go around demanding that others take care of your needs,
> when you're perfectly capable of achieving it for yourself?

Do you think it's socially acceptable to go around dismissing the
needs--you said it yourself, needs--of your users, and trying to
distract, discourage, and deny their requests and attempts to meet
those needs? How hypocritical to say that the users are perfectly
capable of doing it themselves when you didn't accept the patch.

Make up your mind! Either users are ignorant fools who don't know
what they really need, or they are capable people who should go write
their own software. You can't have it both ways when you speak in
absolutes or generalizations. But if they are the latter, that is all
the more reason to listen to them.

> Grow up.
> Mark

I fear that this is the handwriting on the wall. When the SABDFL of
the project tells his passionate, concerned, loyal users to, "Grow
up," it does not bode well.

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you..."