Live data from Hacker News

Betterbird: a fine-tuned version of Mozilla Thunderbird

betterbird.eu

161–170 of 241 posts

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

#161
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…

Brilliant jerks almost always have a net negative impact on a project when you factor in their adverse effects on their teammates. The existence of a competing fork might be healthy, though. Having competition can make your priorities a lot clearer.

The Vim/Neovim is a great natural experiment on this.

Vim is a highly successful project for decades. And one could correctly attribute much of that success to Bram Moolenaar's driving it.

And yet, once Neovim was created with a much "nicer" and broader leadership team, innovation has absolutely skyrocketed, where it's highly likely that Neovim has almost completely replaced Vim as the preferred editor for most Vim users who take the time to think about their editors, customize them, etc.

I wouldn't be surprised if neovim starts replacing vim in distributions within a couple of years.

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

#162
post #39

In all seriousness... given what I've gone through with the behavior of many Mozilla devs, it's hard to wrap my head around what it would take to be "banned for life." That organization's tolerance for poor, unprofessional, and often abusive behavior from devs is extraordinarily high.

Perhaps the poor behavior you've experienced in the past at least aligned politically with the org?

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

#163
post #86
post #52

I am a Thunderbird user since forever, but... I don't know. I want to like Betterbird, but the fact that the author gives so many details about his crusade against Mozilla, puts me off. It looks like revenge-driven development. I don't want to take sides. I just want to read my emails.

Quoted post unavailable.

Since he got banned from the Mozilla org, seems more likely he's the opposite of that.

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

#164
post #52

I am a Thunderbird user since forever, but... I don't know. I want to like Betterbird, but the fact that the author gives so many details about his crusade against Mozilla, puts me off. It looks like revenge-driven development. I don't want to take sides. I just want to read my emails.

This is my take, too. Went to the site, and it's very apparent that it's a "Revenge Inside (TM)" project. Left in 30 seconds. Will probably forget the existence of the project sometime today.

Why exactly do you care what the maintainer's motivations are if the result is a better application?

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

#165
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…

I don't find that email concerning at all given that there are no sources cited so I can't judge for myself whether or not abusive behavior was actually being perpetrated.

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

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I understand you, and I think I broadly agree, but in this case the restriction was specifically on contacting other thunderbird members; that seems like it's clearly still a vertical slice to me.

I think what makes it horizontal for me is that you can't "go home and stop being a Thunderbird member". A "Thunderbird member" is something you are, rather than something you do. So this effectively asserts project ownership over the person. This is why I don't care what they do on project media like ML. That's a social space that's reserved for the project itself, so fair's fair. It's part of their slice, but "Twit…

> "go home and stop being a Thunderbird member"

That's what being banned by an organization is.

If it feels similar to a cult, it's because cults are organizations too (I say this as a former cult member from birth who was shunned for leaving).

Regardless of the merits of the organization, there aren't other effective ways to guide acceptable behavior by its acolytes -- even criminal punishment by governments (organizations) is a related act.

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

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean... it's not a question of "I declared it, so you will do it". It's a question of "You broke the rules once; you can stay in timeout for a week or we can ban you entirely". Would you be bothered if they'd skipped the first part and just banned them from their gruop for making trouble?

I am fine with any judgment Mozilla make on infrastructure that they run and that belongs directly to the project, such as mailing lists, official chatrooms, etc. It's the addition of "unofficial" social platforms that irks me; it seems totalitarizing. Interaction of contributors outside the project ecosystem is none of their business. I prefer for society to be sliced "horizontally", rather than "vertically". I am n…

It very much depends on the situation. Sure, some harmless things you do outside work shouldn't have any effect on your work. But if we're talking about someone literally not believing that certain people (e.g. LGBT) should exist or have rights then I very much believe they can and should be shunned from everywhere regardless of whether they bring that bigotry to work or not. People have a right to not want to interact with others who make them uncomfortable. Imagine being forced to work with someone who doesn't want you to exist and being told to suck it up just because they don't explicitly express those views at work, only outside.

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

#169
post #72
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's complicated. Brave was founded by Brendan Eich, long-time Mozilla developer, long-time Mozilla CTO, briefly Mozilla CEO. Brendan Eich also happened to be an anti-gay-marriage activist and donator (afaik, only his spare time, not at work) and California law says that if you donate more than [some sum of money], you must specify your employer. So, suddenly, a few days after Brendan Eich was nominated CEO, someone…

> Brendan Eich also happened to be an anti-gay-marriage activist and donator (afaik, only his spare time, not at work) Presumably the donations were of money that he made at work.

> Presumably the donations were of money that he made at work.

And? It's his money at that point, is it not? Isn't "work" trading labour for money? While working you abide by the rules and principles of your employer and outside of that, you operate by your own principles.

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

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> position of authority What authority? They can’t force him to not talk to anyone or not Tweet at anyone. He can do whatever he wants. They’re just saying he’s not welcome in their community if he does. It’s their club so their rules.

Right, I wasn't asserting that they're literally getting Twitter to prevent him from making tweets. I just don't think they should even be attempting to set a rule like that. As you said, they're saying he's not welcome in "their community"; that's the part I think is toxic. A project is not a society. People don't live in Thunderbird. There's a widespread forum rule: "don't import drama." The idea behind it is when…

> There's a widespread forum rule: "don't import drama." The idea behind it is when you enter a certain forum, you may know people from elsewhere but you leave that context at the door and enter a new context with different rules. I think that ability to codeswitch into and out of social contexts is an important part of common civility, and overbroad declarations like this undermine it.

That's literally what they are saying: don't import this drama to twitter.

Post reply on HN