> The feedback has to be structured in the correct way so developers can prioritize issues and turn it into a development plan. If it's just complaining about attitudes and making generalized statements, or constantly trying to renegotiate the direction of the whole project, that stuff doesn't help.
Selective absorption of criticism has probably steered gnome to where they are now. Especially if you are talking about the form... akin to the meticulousness of a grammar enthusiast. Since we are on a forum and not a bug tracker or feature request list, the feedback here tends to be more generalized. Also your focus on the form and the distinction between the GNOME Desktop and the GNOME Foundation is deflective when we are primarily talking about user satisfaction for which you made no argument at all besides your personal anecdotes. Why is GNOME considered so great? Why are 8 of the most downloaded/popular extensions designed to rectify the bad decisions made by the GNOME development team? Why are there countless forks? These are all points you conveniently ignored or decided not to engage with. You went for the low hanging fruit.
> Please notice that you're demonstrating extreme prejudice and creating a vicious cycle here: someone makes some negative comments, I lightly push back on them, then somehow not only am I the bad guy but suddenly I've been elected as representative for the entire community and the entire community becomes responsible for my actions too! The subtext here is that I just shouldn't say anything or express my opinions at all because now all the past disagreements and flamewars are now my fault too!
It's not prejudice; it's a consistent reaction from multiple people in this thread to your comments. You might want to reflect on why that is and consider how your responses might be perceived. I am also only engaging with you in this specific subthread, and not elsewhere. Please refrain from distorting the facts to strengthen your argument. No one is suggesting that you represent the entire GNOME community—just that your behavior reflects poorly on its less favorable aspects. You are entitled to your opinions, but no one is obligated to agree with them, just as you don't have to agree with mine.
If you truly believe I’m not entitled to my opinion that GNOME has, overall, done a disservice to the Linux Desktop and its community over the past 15 years, then please, enlighten me:
What would be an acceptable way to express this sentiment while maintaining the same level of concern?
Selective absorption of criticism has probably steered gnome to where they are now. Especially if you are talking about the form... akin to the meticulousness of a grammar enthusiast. Since we are on a forum and not a bug tracker or feature request list, the feedback here tends to be more generalized. Also your focus on the form and the distinction between the GNOME Desktop and the GNOME Foundation is deflective when we are primarily talking about user satisfaction for which you made no argument at all besides your personal anecdotes. Why is GNOME considered so great? Why are 8 of the most downloaded/popular extensions designed to rectify the bad decisions made by the GNOME development team? Why are there countless forks? These are all points you conveniently ignored or decided not to engage with. You went for the low hanging fruit.
> Please notice that you're demonstrating extreme prejudice and creating a vicious cycle here: someone makes some negative comments, I lightly push back on them, then somehow not only am I the bad guy but suddenly I've been elected as representative for the entire community and the entire community becomes responsible for my actions too! The subtext here is that I just shouldn't say anything or express my opinions at all because now all the past disagreements and flamewars are now my fault too!
It's not prejudice; it's a consistent reaction from multiple people in this thread to your comments. You might want to reflect on why that is and consider how your responses might be perceived. I am also only engaging with you in this specific subthread, and not elsewhere. Please refrain from distorting the facts to strengthen your argument. No one is suggesting that you represent the entire GNOME community—just that your behavior reflects poorly on its less favorable aspects. You are entitled to your opinions, but no one is obligated to agree with them, just as you don't have to agree with mine.
If you truly believe I’m not entitled to my opinion that GNOME has, overall, done a disservice to the Linux Desktop and its community over the past 15 years, then please, enlighten me:
What would be an acceptable way to express this sentiment while maintaining the same level of concern?