On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:59 PM, Richard L. Hamilton
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I can't see anything that's a really good solution to _existing_
> apps installing Growl.  However, a license change that simply
> requires apps to ask the user prominently* before installing GrowlHelper,
> GrowlMenu, or extras that act as plugins to already installed apps
> (applied to the next release of Growl, say), could give you the
> means to demand that app developers behave themselves.  At least
> it would mean that as the existing version ages out of circulation,
> the problem would start to go away.
>
> * by prominently, I mean something that defaults to not installing,
> not something where one may have the option but has to do something
> more than keep clicking "continue" to exercise it.
>

My email was sent a bit early.

We cannot change the license now. We've had far too many people
contribute to Growl with very specific opinions about the license
being bsd 3 clause. We're not going to modify our license and then
have to go back and try to get in touch with them, and all other
things.

Long and short of it, is I meant more along the lines of some kind of
kill switch.

> Actually...you might have something to hammer the evil app developers
> with _now_, without a license change.  It seems to me that they're
> probably weaseling on one or both of:
>
>> 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
>>    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
>>    documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
>> 3. Neither the name of Growl nor the names of its contributors
>>    may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software
>>    without specific prior written permission.
>
>
> insofar as they make no effort to make their compliance if any with
> (2) visible to the user; and conversely, Growl, being intentionally
> visible, is sort of self-promoting (esp. when it asks about an
> auto-update).  Thus, the real point of (3), allowing you to retain
> control of your good name, is affected even if one could argue that
> the literal terms of it maybe aren't violated.
>
> Clearly I'm not a lawyer, and no doubt a real one could tear that theory
> up in seconds.  But it makes the point that they're being seriously
> thoughtless if not quite malicious, which might still be enough to
> get some of them to change their conduct.
>
> On Oct 20, 2010, at 10:17 PM, Christopher Forsythe wrote:
>
>> This sort of thing makes me uncomfortable.
>>
>> What wouldn't make me uncomfortable is if we had a way to just kill
>> notifying if a user uninstalled before, and our pkg installer wasn't
>> the thing that reinstalled Growl. But I don't know of a good way to do
>> that without other problems we've discussed previously on the list.
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:05 PM, Tarun Nagpal <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Chris,
>>>
>>> To get back to the issue: Would it be reasonable to block apps that
>>> install Growl surreptitiously? There wouldn't be much of a point of
>>> Dropbox installing growl if Growl no longer accepted Dropbox
>>> notifications. Obviously they haven't responded to a serious issue and
>>> it seems that this sort of punishment would get their attention. Yes
>>> it would hurt users, but the long term benefits should be there as
>>> they clean up their act.
>>>
>>> On Oct 19, 10:03 am, Christopher Forsythe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> My apologies for Nicholas taking up a large portion of time and
>>>> distracting everyone. He is now banned, as stated in the last email if
>>>> he continued on this thread.
>>>>
>>>> Chris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 5:25 AM, Nicholas Sanders <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Chris
>>>>> While I don't entirely agree with you, I have tried to understand what you
>>>>> are saying from your perspective - an impossible but worthwhile aspiration
>>>>> in any circumstances. It is always interesting (if often painful) to learn
>>>>> how others see one, and you clearly have a long memory for my defects.
>>>>> But if I try to see the world from your side, I think it only fair that 
>>>>> you
>>>>> try to see it from mine. For one thing, it is crystal clear that you have 
>>>>> no
>>>>> inkling at all as to why a mere subscriber might take offence at attacks 
>>>>> on
>>>>> the authors of the software, or that the use of certain terms might pain a
>>>>> reader, whoever they are used by and at whom directed. Where I see a 
>>>>> world I
>>>>> only inhabit, you apparently see one which you want to control - no room
>>>>> there for diversity of comprehension, sadly.
>>>>> Whatever of that, I have at no time attempted to defend, excuse or justify
>>>>> my mistake - I have freely admitted it, and apologised for it. What is
>>>>> causing me the problem here is that I feel that I am being insulted and
>>>>> bullied, and I don't like it. The validity of your case (which I in no way
>>>>> dispute) is maligned by your rudeness and your threats, when the most I
>>>>> needed from you was your gentle reminder that my sarcastic one liners do 
>>>>> not
>>>>> in fact help anybody's cause.
>>>>> I am at least two people - one of them wants simply to apologise and 
>>>>> promise
>>>>> to try never to do something of the kind again, while the other is 
>>>>> possessed
>>>>> by the need to assert that this is not because of being threatened. The
>>>>> anger which you hold makes resolution of this dichotomy impossible for me.
>>>>> You say that I have no right to be angry about the kind of post that
>>>>> initiated this thread, but I am not. I don't think you actually mean 
>>>>> "right"
>>>>> here but, in any case, it is not anger that I have felt or feel now. 
>>>>> Rather
>>>>> is there here another human who has his own life experience (clearly very
>>>>> much longer than yours, as it happens), and for whom the issue is rather 
>>>>> one
>>>>> of hurt. And this human feels he has every "right" to be hurt - by the
>>>>> original poster, by your intemperate words, by your bullying behaviour.
>>>>> I have no clear idea as to why you think you will improve a situation by
>>>>> using threats and offensive language but doing so is your choice, just as 
>>>>> it
>>>>> is my choice to continue to discuss the matter in spite of my risking 
>>>>> being
>>>>> banned by doing so. I don't want to be banned, but neither do I want you 
>>>>> or
>>>>> anyone else to think that I accept your threats as a valid basis for my
>>>>> behaviour choices.
>>>>> My closing position is that you are right that my action was childish (I
>>>>> believe I was the first to say so) and you are also right that I have 
>>>>> erred
>>>>> in similar style in the past (which fact may indicate a personality defect
>>>>> similar to your own, although I believe we differ on which is actually
>>>>> poisonous). You are not right to bully or threaten me, not least because 
>>>>> to
>>>>> do so is as ineffective and pointless as my childish remarks, and
>>>>> contradicts your own exhortation to be a nice person too.
>>>>> I have already apologised for causing the upset - I do so again now, 
>>>>> without
>>>>> reservation. I will not enter into any contract not to fail in the same
>>>>> manner again as long as my doing so is conditioned by fear of the result,
>>>>> nor is there any need for me to do so since I have at no time attempted to
>>>>> justify this kind of action anyway and wouldn't perform it if I thought
>>>>> first. Your threats are empty, not because you won't carry them out but
>>>>> because they cannot achieve your purpose.
>>>>> If I have anything further to add to the thread, I will do so direct to
>>>>> yourself - notwithstanding that you have warned me against doing that too.
>>>>> Anyhow, it's late for Eid and early for Thanksgiving - tomorrow is the
>>>>> Birthday of the Bab so I wish all readers the most sincere greetings for
>>>>> that.
>>>>> Nick out…
>>>>
>>>>> On 19 Oct 2010, at 00:30, Christopher Forsythe wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Every time I started to type this email, I found myself not being able
>>>>> to complete it, so I stepped away. I think you aren't reading what I'm
>>>>> saying how I'm thinking it in my head, so I'm going to reiterate it in
>>>>> a different manner. After this, this thread needs to die. If you are
>>>>> confused, reread this. I will be as clear here as I am ever going to
>>>>> be.
>>>>
>>>>> When I thought about what kind of user you are to our community. I
>>>>> came to the conclusion that you are verging on being a poisonous
>>>>> person. Please see
>>>>> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4216011961522818645# if you
>>>>> have not seen it already, it's an excellent talk about the type of
>>>>> person I think you are verging on becoming.
>>>>
>>>>> The reason I say this is due to a pattern in responses which have no
>>>>> value, other than to be annoying. Here is a small list I found by just
>>>>> searching for about 3 minutes, I stopped looking once I hit 4 emails:
>>>>
>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss/msg/a19a2ff6a84ebdd8
>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss/msg/872c304048d33e0a
>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss/msg/74b285e15eb9ebf2
>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss/msg/be17f47730a0cc5f
>>>>
>>>>> Some common themes here are:
>>>>
>>>>> - Lack of useful responses
>>>>> - Sarcasm verging on starting a heated discussion on a thread
>>>>> - Short responses
>>>>
>>>>> This all said, you do provide some great feedback.When I found you
>>>>> provided the best feedback it was about your specific problems though.
>>>>
>>>>> You responded to this user first. The user does not have a way to
>>>>> differentiate who represents the project, and who is merely a member
>>>>> of this mailing list/discussion group. As such, you represented this
>>>>> entire group. You did so in a very sarcastic manner, with none of the
>>>>> following:
>>>>
>>>>> - No quality control.
>>>>> - No useful information to help the end user
>>>>> - No helping at all
>>>>
>>>>> All of this to what end? No good one as far as I'm concerned. So no, I
>>>>> do not believe you were wishing him a Merry Christmas. I know you were
>>>>> in fact being a prick. Which is why I'm angry at you. You basically
>>>>> just gave us a worse name to this user than we already had to him.
>>>>> Which isn't a good place for us to be in, seeing how this can all be
>>>>> avoided very easily.
>>>>
>>>>> Now, instead, you could have taken these actions, and not come across
>>>>> as someone who is simply out to make himself feel good for 2 seconds
>>>>> for a childish act:
>>>>
>>>>> - Responded with the link to the article about this issue
>>>>> - Responded saying you understand, and providing details about how
>>>>> dropbox is actually doing this, and then how to remove Growl
>>>>> - Not responded at all
>>>>
>>>>> These 3 responses at the very least would have been more beneficial
>>>>> than the response you chose to make.
>>>>
>>>>> Since you decided to send your sarcastic email to the list publicly, I
>>>>> decided to reprimand you publicly. I will reiterate what I said
>>>>> earlier. Do not respond to end users in this manner. They do not
>>>>> deserve to be treated like this. We don't either, but their anger is
>>>>> just, only not justly directed. You however have no right to be angry
>>>>> about it, since it is not affecting you at all.
>>>>
>>>>> I spent more time today thinking about this one thing than anything
>>>>> else. I have a six month old son who is better behaved than you are on
>>>>> this list. I'm not going to sit here and baby sit you, you need to be
>>>>> an adult here. I also want this thread to end, unless the original
>>>>> poster requires more assistance. However, since this thread was
>>>>> derailed, I've already started a direct email with him so he doesn't
>>>>> have to continue to deal with this.
>>>>
>>>>> I have concluded that this is not acceptable behavior to tolerate for
>>>>> these issues. If you respond to another user in a sarcastic manner
>>>>> such as this, I will ban you. If you continue to make me have to
>>>>> respond to you after being very clear in this email, I will also ban
>>>>> you. If you choose to email me or any other member of the Growl
>>>>> project directly to complain about this, I will ban you. Basically,
>>>>> drop the issue, move on, and don't be a prick in the future, and we're
>>>>> all set.
>>>>
>>>>> As far as I'm concerned, this should not have been how this user was
>>>>> handled. You made us look bad. You need to own up to that, and learn
>>>>> from it. I don't want to think about it anymore.
>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>> Nicholas J A Sanders
>>>>> ___________________
>>>>> semiotek
>>>>
>>>>> +44 [0]7092 153 409
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> ___________________
>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>>>> "Growl Discuss" group.
>>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>>> [email protected].
>>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en.
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>>> "Growl Discuss" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>>> [email protected].
>>> For more options, visit this group at 
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Growl Discuss" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> [email protected].
>> For more options, visit this group at 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en.
>>
>
> --
> eMail:                          mailto:[email protected]
> Home page:                      http://www.smart.net/~rlhamil/
> Facebook, MySpace,
> AIM, Yahoo, etc:                ask
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Growl Discuss" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Growl Discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en.

Reply via email to