On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 11:53:18PM +0200, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > That is, I think the fundamental flaw. A user interface that works for the
> > majority is a pretty idiotic goal. A user interface should work for ALL
> > users, and likely should have features to support the majority.
>
> Yeah, of course. If it works for all users, that's even better. Are
> you trying to make an argument out of this now?
Are you trying to argue? Maybe there is hope for you then, although the
above is not an argument. It's better than activey ignoring what people
write.
> > So that argument is *completely* and *utterly* bogus, firstly
> > because you equate majority==newbies, and secondly because it's not
> > a viable goal at all.
>
> So let's see then. The goal is to please you and ignore the majority?
You have weird ways of deliberately misinterpreting and twisting other
persons words. What does it buy you? Time? Ignorance? Shying away people?
> Developers are also users. But the same argument holds true for users.
> You can't find out facts about a user interface by discussing it.
Yeah, that should work, except here, as you immediately drive ad-hominem
attacks and spread FUD (again...). I don't think it's even remotely
possible to really discuss these issues with you.
> at any discussion out there. It is always a few people who are very
> loud at complaining. Are these users representative? No, they aren't.
You jump to conclusions. Maybe they are, maybe they are not. But I already
said that designing just for the majority is an idiotic goal, one that
gtk+ certainly _does not follow_, so telling me that that goal would be a
good goal contradicts reality.
> agree on. But that is not the case here. So, that's why I have made
> the offer of organizing a usability test with the goal to gather some
> facts on the current design compared to whatever we can come up with
> as an alternative. Feel free to ignore that offer.
Well, I certainly didn't ignore it, and unfortunately you know that.
> But if you do, don't expect me to ever discuss user interface issues
> with you again.
Yes, we *know* that your goal is to talk down and ignore this issue. Hint:
you did succeed again.
> The original problem was you accusing me of ignorance. That has been
> proven to be a lie. So please don't continue with it.
Just because you claim something doesn't mean it is proven. Sorry, but
that really is what I think is happening. It's far from being a lie.
> Still you failed so far to give a detailed and useful description of
> your problems.
That's another of _your_ lies. Sorry to use that word, it's really
not appropriate, but aybe if I talk in your language communicaqtion
improves? I even pointed you to working code that exactly reproduces the
desired behaviour (but it's not gtk+2 compatible, if you meant that. And
if you meant that, say so).
> You listed a few things but you never got further than
> half a sentence on each of them.
Another of your lies. You tactics is very simple: people complain
and explain, and you accuse them of not explaining and lieing. Then
people explain some more (because they have no idea which part of
their explanatiomn you didn't understand) and then they get some more
accusations.
In the end, you simply ignore them in good shape, as you always tried to
discuss, it's always the others who play bad and fail to explain their
issues.
> I still don't know what your complaints really are but
You should certainly know *that* by now, even if you might miss some
details. If you are really that dense, then for your sake just *ask*
instead of just producing more accusations. Just because you don't
understand something does _not_ mean people tried hard to explain it. Just
review tis thread.
But as your goal is not discussion but ignoring others (for whatever maybe
understandable reasons), this only drives people away again, with no
resolution for either side. It's just too frustrating to explain things
again and again and be told to stop whining and start explaining things.
> that you want the text entry back.
Well, at least that part got through.
> A useful complaint includes use cases, describes a
> certain workflow and outlines where the current UI gets into your way.
This has been done multiple times. You keep ignoring this and ask for it.
Maybe you don't receive all of the mails from this list?
In any case, I just tried to point out to you that you factually do
ignore this kind of discussion (in a very active way, actually, but
nevertheless), but you still don't get it. I won't intrude further into
your world, as all I wanted to do has been done, even though I couldn't
get through to you like so many others couldn't.
"I am out of here again"
--
The choice of a
-----==- _GNU_
----==-- _ generation Marc Lehmann
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / http://schmorp.de/
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
