On 28/10/11 13:42, SRoesgen wrote:
> If "you" is used by you, Mr Shuttleworth, to address me, as a person, I
> have to question why, exactly I am the evil doer now, especially if I
> have done nothing wrong but to speak out what was already written many
> times before?

There is no evil-doing, but there is constructive engagement and
unconstructive engagement.

When two people disagree, it's not constructive to keep bringing that
up, time and again. There are plenty of other things for us to debate
and discuss. This matter is settled, we will enjoy our collaboration
more if we accept that and move on.

>  I only emphasized that it could be rather helpful for any
> person participating in a community to understand the processes used in
> decision making.

The decision making process is straightforward, and not unclear in any way.

Developers make decisions. Designers make decisions. In Unity, when
there is a disagreement, we defer to the designers. They are not always
right, and they might change their mind, but they have the
responsibility to make these decisions. And I have a role in that, a
final one, in order to ensure decisions can be taken rather than going
around in circles endlessly.

That much is crystal clear.

And in this case, you have heard from other designers, and from me.

>  And by referring to this wish to understand the
> process, I only participated in a discussion started by this bug report
> (which was not filed by me, so here again, who is meant with "you"?). So
> again: "on what data was that design decision based?" And who actually
> participated in the process of making the decision? A simple question
> which can be answered in many forms, but none of the replies and answers
> yet given to this question, has ever been addressing the question
> itself.

There is nothing mysterious about this. We have developers (community
and professional), we have designers (the same), and there is me. You
have heard from all of them, and I have settled the matter.

Transparency is not a guarantee that you will like the result. Try and
get answers and responses like this from other platforms, and I think
you'll be more appreciative of the difference between this project and
those.

>  I only hear you utter your own complaints about those complaints
> that are brought forward by other.

Complaining rarely solves problems. The bug has been filed. It has been
commented on. A decision has been taken.

>  If the community is, in your opinion,
> a factory of bug solvers and bug filers, then please say so.

It is not, and you know that, please do not put words in my mouth.

>  But if the
> community is, or should be, a community of those who are enthusiastic
> about Ubuntu, have visions about Ubuntu, want to spread Ubuntu ... then
> you should take the opinion of these people into account and attach more
> value to their words.

There are cases where it is not possible to please everyone. In this
case, it is not possible to please you. I'm at peace with that. Not
because I disrespect or undervalue your participation and opinion, but
because ultimately I have a job to do, I don't pretend to be perfect,
and I do it to the best of my ability; and part of that means taking
decisions and moving on. In that light, this bug feels very much like
loud complaining about something that will never be satisfactorily resolved.

> I spent many hours to set up Ubuntu PCs for my friends and for my
> family. I talked about Ubuntu and promoted Ubuntu at work and wherever
> else I could. There are many entries, filed by my, in many places on the
> internet, where I tried to promote Ubuntu. So in your opinion this is
> worth nothing, because I -- and many other -- are selfish and demand
> without providing solutions. I am sorry. I studied Latin, Greek, English
> and French with a focus on historical comparative linguistics. I am a
> linguist, or more precisely a philologist. So I am not a programmer. Am
> I to be rendered mute by this fact, because I can only speak my opinion
> if I contribute to software by programming it? Is this your vision of
> Ubuntu? A "quid pro quo" or "do ut des"  relation? Indeed, Ubuntu, the
> name of an operating system for every human being.

No, it is quite definitely not necessary to offer programming as a quid
pro quo. But it is necessary to appreciate that every request comes at a
cost, and occasionally the cost might be higher than you can appreciate,
and higher than is justified. This is such a case.

> I defended Ubuntu and especially Unity. I said it will mature and many
> of its feature, like the dash, like indicators, are very promising. I
> hoped that there would be reasoning if 154 users voted for "affect me",
> so that at least somehow  the decisions that was made would be
> reconsidered. So that at least somebody would  tell the people "we will
> think about it, but we cannot promise that we will change anything".
> Instead it was a "it stays that way and Basta!" decision. This is what
> this bug is about. And this is what you did not understand a bit. The
> word is  "transparency". I do not demand a change in the system, I do
> demand an explanation why the change will not be done.

Demands again. What do I demand of you?

Transparency is the right to understand who is taking a decision. Since
you've seen me express a view on this bug, and you know my
responsibilities, why would you doubt the transparency of the decision
or the project?

>  And do not tell
> me that making it possible to change the position of the launcher will
> produce bugs and tons of errors. Some time ago it was said, by one of
> the lead developers, by one of your lead developers, that it would take
> two weeks to change this and a little bit of additional time for fine
> tuning.

Two weeks is several thousand dollars. And that's not the point.

We can put notifications in a particular place because we know the
launcher is not on the right. We can put lenses in a particular place
because we know the launcher is not at the bottom. We can put indicators
in a particular place because we know the launcher is not at the top.
The rest is left as an exercise for the reader.

And even that's not the point.

Every option affects the code. It affects the code every time we come
back to change the code. Every design change needs to factor in all the
possible supported positions of the launcher. You think it's low cost?
Then you pay it.

> So what is the answer to this. To 154 people? And supposedly there are more than 154 people, but most of them will perhaps not have a launchpad account. 

There are nearly 20 million users of Ubuntu, as best we can tell. A
celebrity bug is not always a good indication of what they want.

> Unity is great in many aspect. And I can ignore the current problems with the multi monitor support, despite the fact that I work with two monitors. For it was communicated very early that these problems will be addressed. And I was content with it. But some decision I do not understand and I deem these decisions pure ignorance. I am sorry to put it that way, but I have an opinion, I have a mouth to speak this opinion, and I have a mind to assess the answers which I hear.
> Disagree with me. Disagree with 154 people. That can happen. Plato was not a friend of democracy either. The reign of the mindless he called it. Still he intended the good for the people. If this is your idea of making decisions, then this works for me. But be honest about it. Say that you do not want opinions.

Opinions were expressed and discussed when the bug was opened. They were
responded to quickly and openly. What follows is not the expressing of
opinions. It is nagging :-). You haven't changed your opinion since the
bug was opened; so you'll need to find a new word for
ongoing-and-endless-expressing-of-the-same-opinion ;-)


>  That you want only exchange. And if my private and puny work at promiting Ubuntu is not enough to take me serious.

That may be how you feel about what I said, but it bears little
resemblance to what I said.

Mark