Re: Err..To Desktop Or Not To Desktop?

> But we're NOT The People.  We're the programmers.  We should be
> closer to the Style Guide than they are.

No, you shouldn't. Here's why. Your position of importance (and yes, it is
a position of importance) happens to be no greater than that of any
current, or potential user.

> What disturbs me is the total news blackout, the total lack of
> _any_ information about the impending Style guide.  Isn't there
> any room for compromise on this?  Is it all or nothing?  Couldn't
> you post some of it, the major parts, or even just the headers,
> and then ignore us while we grumble about it amongst ourselves?

As I've said many times, and will continue to say, I wish it were
different too. I wish I -could- dispense with the formalities and lay the
groundwork for the Style Guide in a completely public fashion. However, I
know it would only serve to confuse, and distort the document, to have it
chopped and bandaged a thousand times before even having a rough draft
come out of it. No one wants that to happen, obviously.

What affects the authoring of the Style Guide, is the process of argument 
and discussion. Im watching all of it, and taking into account the
reocurring themes I see cropping up in the course of public debate. This
is whats going to have an impact on what the style guide contains, not
bickering, or flaming.

Nothing will be written which DOESNT make coherent sense, which DOESNT fit
into the overall plan, and DOESNT reflect the desires of the majority.
Thats youre guarantee. Open the floor to the process, and you effectively
destroy all three over time, leaving you with an incoherent, near-sighted,
loosely connected Style Guide GNOME wil have to live with until the
programmers figure out how truly screwed up it is down the line.

> John
> P.S.--And could you please tone down the caustic sarcasm?  You're
> in a high profile position right now, and it can only damage the
> process when you flame like that.  It only serves to make people
> more wary of the content you'll put into the Guide, when they
> read the content you put into your posts.

If I see a problem, I fix it. What do you do?

When someone comes along, half-cocked and half-informed, and begins
spouting rhetoric which is not only danaging to the development process,
but indicative of his lack of understanding of the issues..What do you

You can disagree with me; Thats fine. Infact, I encourage people to
disagree with me when a point is being argued, even if its for the sake
of playing Devil's Advocate.. But I would really prefer that people have a
clue before stepping up the plate. Otherwise, theyre wasting their time,
my time, and yours, for having to read what theyre saying.

Remarkably, I've managed to survive the 90's with my sense of "right" and
"wrong" still intact. :) Its simply a question of Right vs. Wrong,
Informed vs. Uninformed..And personally, I dont make it a habit of being
on the fence regarding either issue. Its very easy to tell from someone's
comments and criticisms whether or not they have a firm grasp of the
subject at hand; It sticks out like a sore thumb on a person when they

Theres nothing "caustically sarcastic" about my telling someone to take
a little time out, go back, and do their homework. They should have done
it for themselves in the first place, before commenting.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]