You can criticize all you want, but I notice you neglected to share any of that actual criticism in your comment. Closing a bug as wontfix isn't an insult, please stop taking that personally. All open source projects reject bugs sometimes. Every project gets to determine their own threshold for what features they remove and what bugs they close as wontfix. All projects reject bugs. There's a comment from down thread about KDE developers doing exactly the same thing:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34395682But you also have to make sure your criticism is good. Just complaining that a feature was removed "because I was using it" is not a useful criticism. I learn nothing from reading that. You have to actually explain why you needed the feature, how you were using it, and why the newer options don't work for you.
>Mostly the gnome supporters imply that the complainers are just plain stupid
I don't see the author claiming anyone's stupid in that article. This is what the author says:
>it is just bad file organisation coupled with a bunch of old bad habits
And maybe on that note, you could consider that designers know a lot more about the habits of users than a random drive-by commenter, considering they study it for a living?
But you also have to make sure your criticism is good. Just complaining that a feature was removed "because I was using it" is not a useful criticism. I learn nothing from reading that. You have to actually explain why you needed the feature, how you were using it, and why the newer options don't work for you.
>Mostly the gnome supporters imply that the complainers are just plain stupid
I don't see the author claiming anyone's stupid in that article. This is what the author says:
>it is just bad file organisation coupled with a bunch of old bad habits
And maybe on that note, you could consider that designers know a lot more about the habits of users than a random drive-by commenter, considering they study it for a living?