(1) I'll post whatever I want on my own blog, whether it has anything to do with Cake or not (the last few posts really don't). I'll continue to do so, because I don't owe you anything. And nothing I've ever posted has anything to do with Daniel directly (probably not indirectly either).
(2) Am I raining down fire and brimstone here on this mailing list? No. (3) Dissent is great, my problem is the attitude in which it is expressed. (4) This is a personal matter, and I'll keep my own counsel on how to handle it and "build community" (See my previous comment regarding other peoples' opinions on the issue [i.e. I don't care]). On Jun 3, 1:56 pm, villas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > @nate > To sum up the absurdity of your own position, look no further than > your own blog which boasts three posts in over a year. > > Example: http://cake.insertdesignhere.com/posts/view/19 > "No One Really Cares. Come on people, it's just blogging. You're not > writing the next Dan Brown thriller. Quit over-analyzing and post it > already. Just throwing that out there." > > IMO Cakebaker is much more thoughtful than just "throwing it out". > But, in any case, why wouldn't he be allowed to express questionable > personal opinions and make mistakes? Let the one who has never been > argumentative or made a mistake, cast the first stone. It certainly > shouldn't be you! > > Your next post is no doubt a fascinating insight into Cake, the > "Greater Internet F**kwad Theory". To be honest, I couldn't even > make myself click into that one. I suppose you think this warrants > your own presence on the blog list just because it's your blog and > what you say is always good and right? Give us a break. > > How do you expect to build any sense of friendly community with such > fire and brimstone raining down from the top! For goodness sake, > chill out and allow people to speak their minds and dissent a little > (maybe half as much as you allow yourself would be fine). > > You make a massive contribution to Cake. However, CakeBaker is also, > in his own individualistic way, making some contribution too. Cut the > guy some slack. > > On Jun 3, 5:43 pm, Nate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > At the risk of getting embroiled in yet another heated debate, I'm > > going to respond to this *once*: > > > While his recent posts have been somewhat informative and helpful, in > > my opinion they are more than outweighed by the months of posts which > > were critical, argumentative, and just generally unhelpful. Daniel > > seems to like to argue for the sake of arguing, which is > > counterproductive. Rather than pointing out improvements in a > > constructive way, he chooses to simply tear down, attack, and question > > in a condescending way. This gets people riled up, and I end up > > having to waste my time explaining my decisions and why Daniel is > > wrong. This is time I could be spending fixing bugs or adding > > features. > > > Also, Daniel has a pathological aversion to taking any kind of > > responsibility for anything he does or says. is latest post (http:// > > cakebaker.42dh.com/2008/06/02/new-callback-methods-for-components/) is > > a perfect example. Rather than taking responsibility for not noticing > > features which have been in the core for years, he blames us for the > > fact that they are "well hidden", which is utterly absurd, as they are > > used in core components and were mentioned specifically in the > > changelog (https://trac.cakephp.org/wiki/changelog/1.2.x.x). > > > But the most classic example of all is > > here:http://cakebaker.42dh.com/2007/08/31/what-do-i-wrong-that-the-other-p.... > > The absurdity of blaming others for your own shortcomings is just > > dumbfounding. > > > This problem poisons all communication between him and the members of > > the CakePHP team, it was the cause of the rift between him and the > > Cake team in the first place, and I don't want someone like that > > associated with the official resources of this project. As someone > > who's invested a great deal of personal time and effort into this > > project, I think I'm well within my rights to make that decision. His > > behavior is outside the bounds of what I consider a productive member > > of an Open Source community (I am most certainly not alone in my > > opinion), and so far I have seen no evidence of his willingness to > > change. > > > For those of you who disagree with my decision, let me put this to you > > very plainly: I don't care. This is a personal decision which no one > > outside the core team has any right to a voice in. I am not > > preventing anyone from reading Daniel's blog, nor am I trying to. > > Nor, for that matter, am I disparaging the technical content of it, > > which by and large is quite good. My decision is based on a person > > and his attitude, an attitude which, again, I do not feel reflects the > > Open Source spirit (and again, feel free to disagree with me, because > > I don't care). > > > If at any point in the future, Daniel chooses have a more productive > > attitude, I would welcome his input openly, in all matters of this > > project. But until then, I have no wish to support such a person by > > consciously allowing him to benefit from my personal efforts and those > > of my friends and teammates. > > > On Jun 2, 9:02 pm, villas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > How does the Cake Team choose the list of blogs mentioned on > > > cakephp.org? > > > > If the listing is chosen objectively, it should include those blogs > > > with the highest quality and quantity of posts. Especially those > > > which are helpful to general Cake users. > > > > On what basis therefore is CakeBaker's blog excluded? > > > http://cakebaker.42dh.com > > > > CakeBaker's posts have consistently been high quality, informative > > > and interesting. And, more importantly, he is the most prolific > > > blogger that the Cake community has (as far as I know). > > > > He may be opinionated and irritate the Core Team. However, as far as > > > I can see, he is always open to other opinions and corrections. > > > Indeed the debates in the blog comments are in themselves > > > enlightening. It is generally postive and honest about Cake even when > > > shortcomings are noted. And as we all know, top class open source > > > projects have nothing to fear from those who make positive criticism. > > > Indeed they are only strengthened by it. > > > > Good bloggers should not be taken for granted and ignored, they > > > should be embraced and encouraged. > > > > I may be a lone voice in the desert, but I would respectfully ask for > > > the Cake webmaster to reconsider CakeBaker's inclusion in the list, > > > that is until of course he is overtaken by other, even higher quality > > > bloggers :-)- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CakePHP" group. To post to this group, send email to cake-php@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
