On Sunday, 18 June 2017 at 20:04:48 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 at 11:59:34 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
As D continues to grow, there will be messages like this
posted more frequently. Imagine that you work at a large
company and are considering adopting D so you decide to check
out the forum.
Posts like this have to be deleted from the website and users
that post such things need to be banned. Like it or not, this
is marketing.
I strongly disagree about deletion and banning. The moment you
start removing dissenting opinions, you move towards a bubble
where you get isolated from the world. These people are
detailing real frustrations that they had, albeit in a shrill
manner, feedback that doesn't hurt.
As for their posts affecting corporate perception, better they
see the truth now and know what they're getting into, rather
than the companies coming in here and ranting later, only to
get their posts deleted too! :D
Yes - from my perspective, the way you know something is true is
if you can recognise it as potentially such and expose it to
critique and there hasn't been a _good_ argument against it.
It's certainly true that the more corporate types will be put off
by the directness and passion of discussions here, but I really
don't think they are likely to be earlier adopters of D. The
people who will be early adopters are discerning principals who
have the ability to make decisions personally and bear the
consequences rather than managerial agent types operating in a
world where social perception dominates. The managerial types
will come later - that's the price of success that it draws a
different kind of person. From a hiring perspective, it's a
positive thing that very few people are involved with D primarily
for careerist reasons - even though I can think of quite a few
people for whom it's turning out to be pretty good indeed, and
where taking a more conventional route would not have had this
payoff over time.
This being said, there is only one problem which is that anyone
can say anything and until you know who is insightful then it's
not in the beginning obvious. Some people here (not many) for
example that are highly intelligent are constantly criticising
the direction of the language - but I'm really not sure they do
much in D at all - they just like hanging out here and arguing:
for them it is like sports.
So I think people should earn the right to be listened to and who
they are and what they have contributed sets the context for how
one should understand a passionate critique, even rant. If Manu,
for example, (I am thinking of a while back) expresses
frustration and in very specific terms about infelicities then
that's something we should take seriously because it's evident
that he cares about the language and community and would just
like to remove such infelicities because they get in the way of
it being adopted by colleagues and associates. We might not be
able to change much in the short term, but such a thing one
should take seriously.
As Walter said you should listen to your current best customers
not the people who give you friendly 'free advice' when they do
not actually have skin in the game. A community isn't a
democracy - you listen to people who have shown they know what
they are talking about, and the amount of noise people make is
not very related to how much insightful they have to say.
