2014/11/04 0:54 "Peter Nieman" <gmane-a...@t-online.de>: > > On 03/11/14 01:18, Joel Rees wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 2:46 AM, Peter Nieman <gmane-a...@t-online.de> wrote: >>> >>> On 02/11/14 16:45, Marty wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ >>>> >>>> It should be required reading for any participant in a systemd thread. >>> >>> >>> >>> Required reading because of what? In order to learn what an arrogant and >>> insulting pamphlet looks like? I doubt that using the word "dumb" three >>> times in the first few sentences is an intelligent way of convincing anybody >>> of anything. >> >> >> You exaggerate a little. > > > Yes, I do. ;-) > > >> Useful, no matter which side you take? >> >> I think so, although extremists on either side of the debate will >> likely find it irritating: > > > [snip] > > >> And it continues in the same vein, pointing out, much to the apparent >> distress of extremists, that bad arguments are being used on both >> sides of the debate. > > > [snip] > > >> So it's going to be hated by extremists on both sides ... > > > [snip] > > >> I'll agree, everyone who wants to continue discussing or debating >> systemd should read it. Not because it shows how wrong you guys all >> are (on both sides), but because systemd isn't going away any time >> soon and we need to put the dumb arguments _on_ _both_ _sides_ away >> and focus our time on finding ways to make debian's efforts to allow >> multiple inits going forward to work. > > > The pamphlet by the uselessd developer is full of polemics,
I suppose it may be polemic to assert that forking debian and setting up a new community would be labor-intensive, fractious, divisive, and general not a wise use of precious free/libre/open community resources, in short, "dumb". > opinionated judgement, I suppose it may be an opinion that Poeettering's list of fallacies contains fallacies of its own that needed analysis, or that some of the pro- tactics have been as bad as some of the anti- tactics. > and unsubstantiated assumptions about the character of people he has never met. I suppose it might be an unsubstantiated assumption that, for instance, mentioning that Lennart Poettering, who is the leader of the systemd project, when he describes his baby as the one-and-only perfect solution, is maybe subject to favoring his own creation. > To me, that makes his text appear arrogant and - well - useless. Inyour opinion. > You, too, seem to take it for granted that we all agree what an "extremist" is > and what is "right", "wrong", or "dumb", and are making assumptions > about how these "extremists" most likely think and feel > and what will happen in the future. Are you not making assumptions about what my thinking is? > I think we shouldn't make such assumptions. I definitely think we should be careful about what assumptions we make. All of us. -- Joel Rees
