Re: Apologies to gnome-gui if I ever said you guys were flamers...

[Tom Vogt <tom lemuria org>]

Dan Effugas Kaminsky <effugas@best.com> wrote:
> >> with the author of Xlab and posted his things here.
> >
> >this is actually a very good example.
> >your whole proposal of the screenplays was ignorant of the fact that xlab
> >existed. you found out that 90% of the functionality are already there only
> >after someone on this list pointed its existence out to you.
> 
> Tom, why don't you go read what the author of XLab said.  He had NO IDEA his
> program could ever be used for help, and he LOVED the idea.  Do I need to
> pull that quote out for you?

you didn't understand.(tm)

it would have been YOUR job to find out how screenplays can be done, not the
author's one to find out possible applications for his tool.

this also shows in:
> I'm not concerned if something's been done before.

the correct word would not have been "unconcerned", but "ignorant". answer
this, please: did you even look around a bit to find out if something like
xlab exists before making your proposal? or do you love leaving the actual
thinking to other people? stating "hey, showing things via some playback
thingy would be cool" isn't that difficult, you know?



> So, tell me Tom, did I walk up and put up "wouldn't it be cool for the
> computer to figure out what the user wants", or did I make a semi detailed
> proposal as to how it would operate, how it was different, how it was
> better, what needed to be worked out, etc?
> 
> What part of cluehunting appears impossible to you, Tom?

the "I have this cool idea, someone willing to code it, because I can't?"
part.
actually, it doesn't appear impossible, just arrogant. the very least you
can do if you don't want to or cannot code is come up with a detailed
proposal including (and this is the important part) an analysis on existing
systems that are similiar, showing the differences, and pointers to tools,
interfaces or others that might prove useful.

you remind me a lot of the people hanging out in rec.games.design - let me
explain: a lot of people who played these cool computer games want to design
their own. coming up with a basic idea isn't too difficult, so the newsgroup
has a lot of people joining and asking like "hey, how do I design a game?".
about 90% are blissfully unaware of the fact the game design is a huge
workload of not only design, but documentation, communication (with the
programmers, graphic and sound people and so on), reality checking (both for
technical feasability and markets) and, last not least, pure administration
and paperwork.
no, what these guys want to do is come up with a nice, semi-refined idea,
maybe a couple of pages, throw it at someone to do the real job and get
payed for that.

you have a strikingly resemblance to these people, and at least the "couple
of pages" part is quite on the mark.

needless to say, I'm not aware of ANYONE in the whole games industry, from
computer to board- or cardgames, who ever DID get a job with that attitude.

I'm not surprised that the reaction you get from the gnome-coders is very
much like what you'd get from any big games company with the same kind of
approach.



I'll stop ranting now, and I'll spare you detail comments on the rest you
wrote, because everything else follows from this in a trivial way.


-- 
Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
		-- Henry Spencer