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

111–120 of 241 posts

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

#111

Post by mort96 »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #85
mort96 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Linus himself did think that his behavior was a big enough issue that he took serious steps to do something about it, and is now a completely different person in mailing lists. But note that your parent comment said "almost always", not "always". The Linux project isn't exactly typical.

> Linus himself did think that his behavior was a big enough issue that he took serious steps to do something about it He really did not. He simply aged and had kids. With age everything looks "not important enough to be upset by" Believe me.

I don't think that's giving him enough credit. There was a very marked moment where he wrote to mailing lists about how he realized it was a problem and took some time away from the keyboard to work on himself. I don't know what to google for to find the e-mails now, but it was very clearly intentional.

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

#112

Post by FeepingCreature »

p4bl0 wrote: post #107
FeepingCreature wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

Right, then I believe you'll agree there's a difference between "the community" and "we who claim to speak for the community." At first look, this seems like the latter.

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

#113

Post by peoplefromibiza »

mort96 wrote: post #111
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Linus himself did think that his behavior was a big enough issue that he took serious steps to do something about it He really did not. He simply aged and had kids. With age everything looks "not important enough to be upset by" Believe me.

I don't think that's giving him enough credit. There was a very marked moment where he wrote to mailing lists about how he realized it was a problem and took some time away from the keyboard to work on himself. I don't know what to google for to find the e-mails now, but it was very clearly intentional.

He was already almost 50.

I'm giving him a lot of credit for doing it, that proves he wasn't an abusive person, he just was himself.

It's the World around him that changed and he adapted.

A lot of people do not adapt and think that their sensibilities are other people's problems.

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

#114

Post by CJefferson »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #64
rtpg wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would you propose as an alternative to people who just… constantly fill mailing lists with attacks on people or the like? Reasonable people don’t need to have such harsh actions applied of course. But reasonable people don’t end up getting to this point! I am a bit partial to messaging when someone is banned like this, but there are definitely cases where people will just keep on arguing about something forever…

It's more the idea of an organization claiming they have the authority to forbid you from tweeting at members . It's like they're trying to split the world into two halves, organization members and outsiders, draw a fence around the organization membership and assume control over who is allowed to cross that fence and how. To be clear: I don't think any organization should ever have that sort of power. If it was just…

I've seen plenty of harassment which in principle insults code. It easy to say things like "Part X of the code base is a piece of ** and should be deleted", or "Recent PR 1234 is awful" -- no-one's name is mentioned, but everyone knows who is in charge of X, or who wrote PR 1234.

In terms of "this sort of power", you are of course welcome to ignore them asking you to not tweet at them -- just don't expect to be allowed back into the community. It seams reasonable to me to say while you are in "time out" to not keep pestering the council, or Thunderbird community in general, during those 3 months.

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

#115

Post by FeepingCreature »

CJefferson wrote: post #114
FeepingCreature wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more the idea of an organization claiming they have the authority to forbid you from tweeting at members . It's like they're trying to split the world into two halves, organization members and outsiders, draw a fence around the organization membership and assume control over who is allowed to cross that fence and how. To be clear: I don't think any organization should ever have that sort of power. If it was just…

I've seen plenty of harassment which in principle insults code. It easy to say things like "Part X of the code base is a piece of ** and should be deleted", or "Recent PR 1234 is awful" -- no-one's name is mentioned, but everyone knows who is in charge of X, or who wrote PR 1234. In terms of "this sort of power", you are of course welcome to ignore them asking you to not tweet at them -- just don't expect to be allow…

It seems deeply unreasonable, infantilizing and arrogant to me. Different preferences, maybe. It's the sort of thing I'd expect from a religion.

> I've seen plenty of harassment which in principle insults code. It easy to say things like "Part X of the code base is a piece of * and should be deleted", or "Recent PR 1234 is awful" -- no-one's name is mentioned, but everyone knows who is in charge of X, or who wrote PR 1234.

I think that's specifically the sort of feedback I want to embrace. Everybody writes awful code, it's normal. Not calling it awful doesn't make it better, and the goal of the project is good code over happy contributors - happy contributors only matter insofar as they lead to good code, and I think contributors who are made unhappy by people calling their code bad, probably don't write good code as a rule. (How do you get better if you shield yourself from negative feedback?)

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

#116

Post by rainbowzootsuit »

return_to_monke wrote: post #73
kayson wrote: post #5

I really love Thunderbird; I've been using it for at least a decade now. There are definitely places where it still needs improvement, after years and years. While Betterbird seems exciting in theory, the attitude of the project leader (who it seems is a banned former contributor to Mozilla Thunderbird), and honestly even the arrogance in the name itself gives me pause. The issues laid out in this[0] email thread are…

Can you give more details on netgate v wireguard? I can't really find the "drama" other than it being added and then pulled

The pfsense kernel implementation was done while ignoring the feedback of the wireguard project creator, Jason Donenfeld. When it shipped I believe the Donenfeld had to call them out because the implementation had issues and it had been merged into the FreeBSD kernel.

This is a starting point to learn about this particular drama:

https://www.reddit.com/r/PFSENSE/comments/m7vi3b/wireguard_r...

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

#117

Post by peoplefromibiza »

bayindirh wrote: post #110
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

No post body was provided.

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

#118

Post by peoplefromibiza »

chrisseaton wrote: post #106
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Where's the vote?

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

Or it's a community of Jerks.

Proud boys think I am a jerk, for sure.

Post reply on HN