2014/11/04 0:54 "Peter Nieman" <gmane-acct@t-online.de>:
>
> On 03/11/14 01:18, Joel Rees wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 2:46 AM, Peter Nieman <gmane-acct@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