On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 4:00 PM, pcrews <[email protected]> wrote: > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/01/msg00153.html > You seem to have a pattern of expecting people to go into painstaking detail > to explain why they don't happen to agree with your ideas.
That's not true. It is true that I don't give up easily and that I like to argue based on arguments. Hence my questions to Ted and David to post those arguments. It took a very long time for Ted to post the real reason for not implementing the feature. > When nobody feels like engaging in the infinite time-sink of trying to > answer "Why aren't things the way I think they should be?", it is not > necessarily a confirmation of the merit of your ideas about how things > should be, but more likely a sign that people don't want to go there / be > bothered with it. One might also argue that it is not a very polite way of > agitating for change in a community project - "If nobody can explain - to my > satisfaction - why things aren't *my* way, I will view it as confirmation > that things *should* be my way" IMO there's a difference between an infinite time sink and no response at all. I can't distinquish between "no opinion" and "no agreement" based on the absense of replies. > I'm not saying your ideas don't have merit, just that the onus is on you to > defend their worth rather than expecting everyone else to defend the way > things are working now. Of course. However, I already posted why I think the two things should be changed. Without a response to those arguments, I don't see what else I could do. Greetings, Olaf _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
