Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Betterbird: a fine-tuned version of Mozilla Thunderbird

betterbird.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 241 posts

Re: Betterbird: a fine-tuned version of Mozilla Thunderbird

#101

Post by WastingMyTime89 »

rjzzleep wrote: post #97
WastingMyTime89 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then the Michael Niedermayer side took back control and the group that took over ffmpeg abdicated power over ffmpeg and its brand and moved to a fork. Once again, no, it’s not what happened. A team forked but failed to gain significant traction and the original project is now the only one remaining. The email you quote comes from just before the fork. Niedermayer was the main maintainer of ffmpeg and as stated ther…

You can say no it's not what happened happened all you want. But here's the announcement from the libav side[1]. It was definitely not a friendly fork. There was clearly a dispute and the Niedermayer side won[2], which led to the fork. But either way Niedermayer was basically BDFL since he took over from Fabrice Bellard until he resigned. That is ultimately one of the things that led to the dispute. Much like what ha…

I had misunderstood your first paragraph and thought you were implying that the fork got the brand after Niedermayer resigned.

Reading carefully I know realise it’s not what you wrote. We are indeed in agreement.

Re: Betterbird: a fine-tuned version of Mozilla Thunderbird

#102

Post by jonp888 »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #98
p4bl0 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ignore them on the client side. it's easy. there's a field called FROM. Do you realize that your discourse politically implies a very individualistic views of how such problems should be dealt with? I don't know the situation here, but let's take it aside and consider another example: some one in an organization is constantly harassing other members (e.g., a guy being heavy with women). If the organization follows…

Quoted post unavailable.

No post body was provided.

Re: Betterbird: a fine-tuned version of Mozilla Thunderbird

#103

Post by peoplefromibiza »

bayindirh wrote: post #88
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You ask yourself what you have done wrong to upset that person. Because it's the only thing you can control. If you start canceling, you will be cancelled. Look where this brought Mozilla... Do you still trust them? Do people still trust them? They are on the verge of oblivion, I only use Firefox because I do not want to live in a browser mono culture. But I've stopped my donations to Mozilla years ago.

> You ask yourself what you have done wrong to upset that person. Are you perfectly sure that people always start from "neutral" or "positive" attitude, even when contacted for the first time? I have been rudely dismissed more than once from some members of some communities over the years, even with very neutral mails. I'm personally very against loaded (in tone) emails, and can be considered even a pacifist, but bei…

> Are you perfectly sure that people always start from "neutral" or "positive" attitude, even when contacted for the first time?

Are you sure they don't?

And how do you know?

You can only know if you do it.

That's the point.

> but being polite, kind and open never guarantees people won't yell at you at first contact.

Because that's not enough.

You have to be understanding too and know when you are wrong too and when other people are right.

Their behaviour is a completely different matter, until it is not borderline criminal, it should be considered as an expression of their feelings.

People have them, not all of us are soulless robots like me.

My doctor shouting to my face to take the f*king medicine, is probably trying to help me.

Me doctor telling me kind words, knowing very well my lazy ass, is probably not giving a flying f*ck about me.

Re: Betterbird: a fine-tuned version of Mozilla Thunderbird

#104

Post by p4bl0 »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #98
p4bl0 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ignore them on the client side. it's easy. there's a field called FROM. Do you realize that your discourse politically implies a very individualistic views of how such problems should be dealt with? I don't know the situation here, but let's take it aside and consider another example: some one in an organization is constantly harassing other members (e.g., a guy being heavy with women). If the organization follows…

Quoted post unavailable.

No post body was provided.

Re: Betterbird: a fine-tuned version of Mozilla Thunderbird

#105

Post by jamespo »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #87
chrisseaton wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You ask yourself what you have done wrong to upset that person. Some people seem to just inherently be a bit nasty, even if it’s the very first time you interact with them and so nothing you’ve done at all.

> Some people seem to just inherently be a bit nasty Those people could think the same thing about you. "amount of nastyness" it's not an internationally recognized standard unit of measure and it depends a lot on culture, status, social class, and a lot of other more subtle things. You can't even imagine how many stereotypes on Italians I have to endure in a normal, professional, conversation with North Americans, w…

yeh, it's not all about you fella

Re: Betterbird: a fine-tuned version of Mozilla Thunderbird

#106

Post by chrisseaton »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #87
chrisseaton wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You ask yourself what you have done wrong to upset that person. Some people seem to just inherently be a bit nasty, even if it’s the very first time you interact with them and so nothing you’ve done at all.

> Some people seem to just inherently be a bit nasty Those people could think the same thing about you. "amount of nastyness" it's not an internationally recognized standard unit of measure and it depends a lot on culture, status, social class, and a lot of other more subtle things. You can't even imagine how many stereotypes on Italians I have to endure in a normal, professional, conversation with North Americans, w…

If 90% of the community think you’re a jerk then it’s probably you that’s the jerk.

Re: Betterbird: a fine-tuned version of Mozilla Thunderbird

#107

Post by p4bl0 »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #94
p4bl0 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ignore them on the client side. it's easy. there's a field called FROM. Do you realize that your discourse politically implies a very individualistic views of how such problems should be dealt with? I don't know the situation here, but let's take it aside and consider another example: some one in an organization is constantly harassing other members (e.g., a guy being heavy with women). If the organization follows…

They could just inform the police. They could even help victims to inform the police. The problem with the "collective" approach is that it often creates unaccountable positions of authority. Guess where bullies will gather? I ain't ever seen a vote to ban on a ML.

Not every wrongdoing to a community is illegal per se. The police has nothing to do with it. And concerning illegal things that the police could act on, the situation in real life is much more complex than you seem to think. First, a legal procedure can take time and as a collective you may want to protect the victims and your organization in the meantime. Second, you can encourage but never force a victim to go to the police and through a legal procedure that may requires them to go through their trauma again and again, especially since the justice system does not exist outside of our societies and so has the same biases that makes many forms of harassment possible in the first place, making the procedure outcome not always favorable to the victims, who you may want to protect at your organization level nonetheless.

The way you see the collective approach has nothing collective if it is the doing of a few individuals. When I say "collective" I mean that word, not "the unaccountable head of the organization" as you seem to think.

Re: Betterbird: a fine-tuned version of Mozilla Thunderbird

#108

Post by vanous »

flomo wrote: post #29

> Multi-line view like in Outlook, Lotus Notes and Postbox > Betterbird: Yes! > Thunderbird: No, requested since 2003 Wonderful! Back in the mid-2000s, this annoyed me enough to switch from Thunderbird to Outlook for work mail. Great to hear they had to fork the project to match the delicious UI of Lotus Notes. Honestly since then I haven't thought much about local PC mail clients to even consider any alternatives. A…

> Multi-line view like in Outlook, Lotus Notes and Postbox > Betterbird: Yes! > Thunderbird: No, requested since 2003

What kind of obligation do opensource projects have when someone makes a feature request? Honest question, because i see this mentioned as an argument. I presume no one is stopping anyone from developing it and proposing a PR, if the "main dev team" or whoever is running the project is not seeing that feature request as a priority.

Re: Betterbird: a fine-tuned version of Mozilla Thunderbird

#109

Post by vanous »

starik36 wrote: post #9
RockRobotRock wrote: post #2

Don't say that its better, show how its better.

There is a feature comparison link on the front page in the second paragraph.

Does this fork provide Debian packaging for autoupdates? If not, that is one feature that is missing from the project and from the feature comparison...

Re: Betterbird: a fine-tuned version of Mozilla Thunderbird

#110

Post by bayindirh »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #103
bayindirh wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You ask yourself what you have done wrong to upset that person. Are you perfectly sure that people always start from "neutral" or "positive" attitude, even when contacted for the first time? I have been rudely dismissed more than once from some members of some communities over the years, even with very neutral mails. I'm personally very against loaded (in tone) emails, and can be considered even a pacifist, but bei…

> Are you perfectly sure that people always start from "neutral" or "positive" attitude, even when contacted for the first time? Are you sure they don't? And how do you know? You can only know if you do it. That's the point. > but being polite, kind and open never guarantees people won't yell at you at first contact. Because that's not enough. You have to be understanding too and know when you are wrong too and when…

> Are you sure they don't?

I've seen conversations with or without me on either side of the spectrum, so it's not a given.

> And how do you know?

By writing neutral, simple, kind e-mails and messages to people.

> You have to be understanding too and know when you are wrong too and when other people are right.

Asking something you don't know to someone you never contacted before cannot contain the points you mentioned. If the conversations are ongoing, then things are different. It's important to be able to accept you're wrong and do it humbly. That's also very correct, but sending an email in the tone of "Hello, I'm wondering about this, can anybody point to me to the right direction, because I've failed to achieve it myself." Has neither right, nor wrong in it. Also, it can't contain anything more than appreciation of others time (and you show it by not spamming the person or the list).

> Their behaviour is a completely different matter, until it is not borderline criminal, it should be considered as an expression of their feelings.

Borderline criminality is not a defined international standard and can‘t be put on a scale homogenized throughout all cultures and conversation styles. It's also important to note that while the sending party is not entitled to replying party's kindness, replying party is not entitled to be tolerated for its tone of choice. This is why we have politeness and kindness as an international standard and aspired underpinning of conversations throughout this planet.

One can show their emotions perfectly well without yelling or being rude, too, if wishes to chose that way.

> My doctor shouting to my face to take the f*king medicine, is probably trying to help me.

Then you should first ask yourself what you have done to your doctor to deserve this reaction, maybe?

> Me doctor telling me kind words, knowing very well my lazy ass, is probably not giving a flying f*ck about me.

No. Some people say strong words kindly. They can only tell "You'll just die if you continue doing this." with a calm tone, and you may lose sleep over it for a month. The choice is, of course, yours.

So, as a result, we come to the conclusion of "If both parties act reasonably, then kindness and politeness is a natural outcome".

Then as a corollary, we can ask that "If everyone behaving reasonably, why at least one of the parties is not polite?"

Post reply on HN