Emails - Arrrgh!

[greggh]

By the way, I agree with you 100% about not sacrificing "usability" for "ease of use" in Linux. I'm all for evangalizing the benifits of Linux, but I don't think it would be a good idea for Linux to pursue a development agenda aimed at converting people who are too stupid to get their software anywhere else but on a storeshelf in Circuit City. Dann, what are you thinking???

Hmm, okay, then lets just give up on that entire market and let them go to Mac OS X or Windows. That is not a solution. There is no such thing as a stupid user. Only stupid developers who don't understand the needs of their users. The problem with many open source programmers is that they are designing interfaces that make sense TO THEM, not typical end users.

One of the fantastic things about the open source community is that there is so much choice. Advanced users can have applications that suite their needs, and less sophisticated users can have applications that suite their needs. There's no reason why we would have to sacrifice usability for ease of use. We can have it both ways.

It wouldn't be such a bad thing for Linux to give up on some markets. I certainly don't want Linux to start catering to these people. I happen to agree with Stallman when he talks about it being much more important to be concerned with the freedom to do with YOUR software and YOUR computer what you want. Linux should always have as it's focus freedom and choice, and the fact is that there are many users out there that don't give a damn about those two things. Actually too much freedom and choice gets in the way of those folks that refuse to put in any effort to learn what that means in relation to computing and it would be a giant mistake for Linux to concern itself with making istelf acceptable and usable to this segment.

It's kind of ironic, given how much RMS and Linc went at each other on that show, that on this they actually sound very much in sync.

And as to your point...

There is no such thing as a stupid user. Only stupid developers who don't understand the needs of their users.

Are you nuts? The world is lousy with stupid users (all-around schmucks in general).

[hellonorman]

Now I ask you all; Am I really being such a dick?

Since you asked; yes publishing that persons name and email address to a public forum is you being such a dick. Saying that you reserve the right to do it after you have already done it is you being such a dick.

I state my opinions on the show, and further, I am able to back them up in a logical manner, and if I can't, I say so.

You state that most users shouldn't be allowed behind a keyboard. Ok thats your opinion certainly you are entitled to it. If you think that your flawed analogy to car mechanics backs up your opinion then you don't really understand what a logical manner is.

First off your analogy would suggest that only car mechanics should be allowed to get behind the wheel of a car. Or if you believe that a car is a convenience item and a computer is not than your analogy is invalid before it begins.

Either way you have not backed up your opinion in any sort of logical manner.

[CptnObvious999]

It wouldn't be such a bad thing for Linux to give up on some markets. I certainly don't want Linux to start catering to these people. I happen to agree with Stallman when he talks about it being much more important to be concerned with the freedom to do with YOUR software and YOUR computer what you want. Linux should always have as it's focus freedom and choice, and the fact is that there are many users out there that don't give adamn about those two things. Actually too much freedom and choice gets in the way of those folks that refuse to put in any effort to learn what that means in relation to computing and it would be a giant mistake for Linux to cncern itself with making istelf acceptable and usable to this segment.

I disagree. The reason I am using Linux right now is NOT because of freedom. The reason I run Linux is because it is technically better and suites my needs more. Freedom is a nice extra but not the reason I made the switch, infact when I made the switch I had no clue what the GPL was nor even what open source means and neither do a majority of the people switching.

If you are preaching about freedom and the like and a user tries it and it sucks they are simply going to never try it again. Now is that really giving them a choice? Saying you can either run Windows or this piece of shit OS over here and have freedom?

Now I am not saying Linux is shit at all, infact quite the opposite. I am simply saying I think Linux is what it is because it is technically better, not because of the freedom.

[Patrick]

It wasn't the private info that I was concerned about being sold or given away. I don't think that I provided that anyway.

My misunderstanding

My concern was that if I did respond negatively to Linc or any other member of the show is that going to show up here in the forums on the butt end of a rant?

Don't worry we don't need to gang up anyone. Linc is fine at that himself

"chuck@somewhere.com did not like the fact that we do <something> on the show. How dare he say that. He's such an idiot thinking that. How could anyone be like that. etc etc"

I don't know if you're idiot or not. You're free to think anything you want. So is everyone else.

If you all are going to provide a way of feedback, you have to accept the good and the bad. Write off the bad and move on. Abusing the listeners is not the best way to gain positive publicity.

I have a pretty thick skin. Negative emails don't phase me. The feedback is appreciated. I don't know what you mean by abusing listeners.

[Wally Balljacker]

Are you nuts? The world is lousy with stupid users (all-around schmucks in general).

I think you need to ask yourself: Is the user stupid, or did the person who made the application create a lousy interface? Any person that is of average intelligence, capable of learning how to drive a car, or use a typewriter, should have no problem using a computer. If they do, the program was poorly designed.

[chuck]

If you all are going to provide a way of feedback, you have to accept the good and the bad. Write off the bad and move on. Abusing the listeners is not the best way to gain positive publicity.

I have a pretty thick skin. Negative emails don't phase me. The feedback is appreciated. I don't know what you mean by abusing listeners.

Publishing an email with the name and email address that was sent in private to a public forum is an abuse to the listener. It's a smarmy thing to do. If you have an issue with the listeners complaining, that's fine. Rant as you will. Publishing private information to a public forum is underhanded and a cheap shot.

[Wally Balljacker]

It wouldn't be such a bad thing for Linux to give up on some markets. I certainly don't want Linux to start catering to these people. I happen to agree with Stallman when he talks about it being much more important to be concerned with the freedom to do with YOUR software and YOUR computer what you want. Linux should always have as it's focus freedom and choice, and the fact is that there are many users out there that don't give a damn about those two things. Actually too much freedom and choice gets in the way of those folks that refuse to put in any effort to learn what that means in relation to computing and it would be a giant mistake for Linux to concern itself with making istelf acceptable and usable to this segment.

I guess that means you're satisfied with only 5% of the market having those freedoms... Seems selfish to me.

[Linc]

Well the helpful part is if you listened to the constructive criticism as something other than an attack. Just because people disagree with your opinions does not mean that they or you are wrong. Just that you see things from different angles.

There was no constructive criticism. Only opinion and accusation. You seem to think that telling someone they have a bad attitude is constructive. It is not. A bad attitude is a completely subjective thing.

My original post in this thread was to point out that you have the right to rant, but not to take a message that was sent to you and publicize that information without regards to the privacy of that person. Had you not included identifying information I would have responded differently to your points.

The very first thing you did in your post was to say that you, also, were getting ready to point out to me that I have a bad attitude in your opinion. As I mentioned before, that is a subjective thing and therefor trolling. I don't need that crap. If you think the mic levels are off, if you think we should do more post production, if you really want us to trim the show length down, if you would like different kinds of guests, etc.. Those are constructive criticisms. Calling the show hosts names is never constructive.
As for your privacy, I would think that is up to the people you send things to. In fact, do you even know if I asked permission to reprint that email? Just because you wouldn't give me permission doesn't mean that nobody else would. Or the flip side maybe - he didn't ask me to keep it private and I made no insinuation that it would be. Further, are you the privacy police? Do you expect that every webmasters and ISP's version of privacy policies are all identical and they all match your own vision? This email privacy thing is a complete myth unless you are encrypting it, and even then you are taking your chances. As for airing my dirty laundry publicly, that's what I *do*. I do it on the show, I do it on my blog, and I do it in the forums. This is no mystery.

I am not offended by you voicing your opinions. Even when I feel that you are wrong you have a right to them. Just as I and others have a right to express our opinions. If you disagree with them fine, but to disrespect your listeners by betraying their confidences, that takes your rants too far.

This is true - you do have a right to your opinion. I am not forcing my opinion on anyone. You forget that this is my show, not your show. The show is a forum for me to voice my opinion, and I am not forcing it down anyone's throat as I don't force anyone to listen. People that email me out of the blue telling me they don't like me are in essence forcing me to hear their opinion. You just don't get troll disclaimers on email headers like you should.

So any message that is sent to you or posted here that takes a contrary position to yours is a troll? You really need to unwind and figure out what a troll is. From the Urban Dictionary:

One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument

A disagreement is not a trollish action.

The only one arguing/disrupting here in the forum is you Chuck. Perhaps then you are the troll?

You see your reaction to all of this is exactly why I am dubious about providing any other information. What happens if I did say in a comment 'I don't like Linc's attitude'. Are you going to make a post here decrying my statement when you asked for that opinion?

Nahh, everyone here reading this thread already knows all about you.

If you are going to be doing a show for everyone to listen to you have to make some realizations and choices. The first is that everything you believe is considered wrong by at least one other person somewhere out there. You will hear from that person at some point. If you do not want responses to what you say on your show, do not offer a forum or email address to be contacted at.

Ahh, here we go again. Another armchair expert.
Let me ask.. What is it exactly that you think will happen when you email the hosts that they suck or that they are mean. Do you think, as the creator of the show, that they are going to come on the next episode and apologize for offending your sensibilities? That will never happen. All this business reminds me of back in the BBS days. You would have *never* told the SysOp that he was a shrub. You just went along your merry way. These days everyone thinks things are different; that they somehow have the God given right push everyone into being some sort of tolerant wishywash. It's unAmerican I tell you. Here we have the God given right to free speech, as long as it's not forced on anyone,and I am not forcing it. If you don't like my opinions, fine. If you can't respect me for having a differing opinion than your own, than simply don't listen. It really is that simple. Like I said before, I don't mind people telling me they don't agree with me, but don't tell me it's because I am mean or contrite or some other bullshit excuse - something that isn't quite so subjective.

If it help you to sleep tonight, write me off as a troll. I know I'll sleep well no matter what your opinion is of me.

As will I.

This is a quote:
"Hey drop us a line about the show. Feel free to ask questions, provide feedback and criticism, or just ramble on about anything your little heart desires."

That's right! Feel free. Just remember that freedom goes both ways.

[greggh]

It wouldn't be such a bad thing for Linux to give up on some markets. I certainly don't want Linux to start catering to these people. I happen to agree with Stallman when he talks about it being much more important to be concerned with the freedom to do with YOUR software and YOUR computer what you want. Linux should always have as it's focus freedom and choice, and the fact is that there are many users out there that don't give a damn about those two things. Actually too much freedom and choice gets in the way of those folks that refuse to put in any effort to learn what that means in relation to computing and it would be a giant mistake for Linux to concern itself with making istelf acceptable and usable to this segment.

I guess that means you're satisfied with only 5% of the market having those freedoms... Seems selfish to me.

I think you are misunderstanding me. I want everybody who wants to have those freedoms to be able to have them. But when you start to gear development towards those who value convenience and ease of use above all else, including freedom, choice, and not getting locked in, will lead to those compromises that many distros have already started to make and in the long run create something that is less free with less choice and appeals more to those that value niether.

[Wally Balljacker]

It wouldn't be such a bad thing for Linux to give up on some markets. I certainly don't want Linux to start catering to these people. I happen to agree with Stallman when he talks about it being much more important to be concerned with the freedom to do with YOUR software and YOUR computer what you want. Linux should always have as it's focus freedom and choice, and the fact is that there are many users out there that don't give a damn about those two things. Actually too much freedom and choice gets in the way of those folks that refuse to put in any effort to learn what that means in relation to computing and it would be a giant mistake for Linux to concern itself with making istelf acceptable and usable to this segment.

I guess that means you're satisfied with only 5% of the market having those freedoms... Seems selfish to me.

I think you are misunderstanding me. I want everybody who wants to have those freedoms to be able to have them. But when you start to gear development towards those who value convenience and ease of use above all else, including freedom, choice, and not getting locked in, will lead to those compromises that many distros have already started to make and in the long run create something that is less free with less choice and appeals more to those that value niether.

The mass public does value convenience above all else. But why shouldn't they want convenience and ease of use? I think it's important to get people on board with Linux and get them to see all the practical benefits it offers. They can learn about the freedom later. I know, that was the case with me, anyways. I first started using Linux solely because of technical advantages, and because it didn't cost any money. I learned about the freedom it gives me afterwards. I understand where you're coming from, but I don't believe in abandoning all those Windows users out there. They don't know any better.

[Linc]

If you all are going to provide a way of feedback, you have to accept the good and the bad. Write off the bad and move on. Abusing the listeners is not the best way to gain positive publicity.

I have a pretty thick skin. Negative emails don't phase me. The feedback is appreciated. I don't know what you mean by abusing listeners.

Publishing an email with the name and email address that was sent in private to a public forum is an abuse to the listener. It's a smarmy thing to do. If you have an issue with the listeners complaining, that's fine. Rant as you will. Publishing private information to a public forum is underhanded and a cheap shot.

Again Chuck, if it's not your email, how the hell do you know if it was meant to be private? Do you see any little disclaimer notices somewhere, or do you singlehandedly run the privacy controls for the internet?
Do you have *ANY* basis for the claims you are making, or is it simple conjecture, supposition, and quite possibly slander?

[CptnObvious999]

I think you are misunderstanding me. I want everybody who wants to have those freedoms to be able to have them. But when you start to gear development towards those who value convenience and ease of use above all else, including freedom, choice, and not getting locked in, will lead to those compromises that many distros have already started to make and in the long run create something that is less free with less choice and appeals more to those that value niether.

I know this may seem weird and Troels will probably get on me about this but, can't we have the freedom of choosing a distro with less choice (or freedom)? There have been and always will be distros targeted at noobies which try to work out of the box and there are those that would never dare come with anything non-gpl. By having both that in turn gives you more choice or freedom. So what you are saying is that if you run Linux you must only use free software. I'm not trying to be a smartass but isn't that counter freedom?

[Linc]

Since you asked; yes publishing that persons name and email address to a public forum is you being such a dick. Saying that you reserve the right to do it after you have already done it is you being such a dick.

Again, do you have some secret knowledge that there was some agreement or lack thereof concerning the alleged privacy of that letter? Can you give a concrete testimony that I did not have any permission to reprint my own private emails in public, or that I did not obtain permission to do so (not that I need any) or that I gave or give any indication whatsoever that emails to me are private under any circumstances?

You state that most users shouldn't be allowed behind a keyboard. Ok thats your opinion certainly you are entitled to it. If you think that your flawed analogy to car mechanics backs up your opinion then you don't really understand what a logical manner is.

First off your analogy would suggest that only car mechanics should be allowed to get behind the wheel of a car. Or if you believe that a car is a convenience item and a computer is not than your analogy is invalid before it begins.

Either way you have not backed up your opinion in any sort of logical manner.

Wow, I think you are getting a whole lot more out of that than anyone else on the planet did. The mere fact that other people understood my point means that my idea, my opinion, was conveyed. That's all I was looking for. Just because you don't agree, doesn't mean my opinions are not valid, nor does it mean that the logic isn't sound. Perhaps you are just too damn narrow minded to understand it.

Not so fun when the name calling and belittling is on the other foot is it?

[Brian]

Well, you know what? I am sick and tired of pantywaists sending me emails where they pick their supposed moral high ground and stand on their pedestal and call me names and tell me how I should run my show and that if it were theirs they would/could do a better job.

Linc,

this all comes with being popular. Consider it a measure of success and don't take it personally.

[chuck]

The very first thing you did in your post was to say that you, also, were getting ready to point out to me that I have a bad attitude in your opinion. As I mentioned before, that is a subjective thing and therefor trolling.

No, what I said was:

Well I was planning a post later to take issue with your attitude towards users after listening to your rant on last nights show.

I never said that it was a bad attitude. What I was going to suggest was that it was the wrong attitude to have.

All users have to start somewhere. You suggested that aliasing the rm command to 'rm -i' was the wrong thing to do. Why? It protects people when mistyping commands. It's a cautionary thing that is done. No one is perfect. I know that I alias things in a safe way on on most of my own systems and deployed systems just so that I or another person doesn't do something by accident.

You suggest that if users can't be bothered to learn everything about their systems they shouldn't be using them. What about you guys? Obviously you have not learned everything about the systems that you're using otherwise your shows would be technically perfect. Do you know everything about the combustible engine in your car? If not, don't drive it. Do you know how your dinner is killed and prepared? Better not have that hamburger.

Workers and home users know enough to do what they do. The accounts know how to use Excel, Quicken, etc. Engineers know how to use CAD apps. Teenagers know how to use chat clients and myspace. It is what it is.

I had a conversation with one of my customers about two weeks ago. She's a department head at a local university. She was commenting how she's always amazed at how much I know and how I can fix every problem that she's had to deal with on her computer and server. I pointed out that it's not that amazing as that is my job. If I were to try to run her department for a few hours it would be in shambles as I know nothing about the details of her work.

Ahh, here we go again. Another armchair expert.
Let me ask.. What is it exactly that you think will happen when you email the hosts that they suck or that they are mean. Do you think, as the creator of the show, that they are going to come on the next episode and apologize for offending your sensibilities? That will never happen. All this business reminds me of back in the BBS days. You would have *never* told the SysOp that he was a shrub. You just went along your merry way. These days everyone thinks things are different; that they somehow have the God given right push everyone into being some sort of tolerant wishywash. It's unAmerican I tell you. Here we have the God given right to free speech, as long as it's not forced on anyone,and I am not forcing it. If you don't like my opinions, fine. If you can't respect me for having a differing opinion than your own, than simply don't listen. It really is that simple. Like I said before, I don't mind people telling me they don't agree with me, but don't tell me it's because I am mean or contrite or some other bullshit excuse - something that isn't quite so subjective.

This is the problem. You're saying here that everyone has a right to their opinion as long as they keep it to themselves. You're saying that it's ok for you to express yourself because it is 'your show'. Well these forums are here to discuss 'your show' therefore you might be the topic once in a while, like it or not.

And the thing is, if you are perceived as mean you have to accept that people will think as they will. You cannot tell them that they are wrong because it is an opinion on your part, just as it is theirs.

No one if forcing you to read this forum. From what is talked about on the show Allen tends not to read these.