gnodal (gnodal) wrote,

If GTD is anti-social, then what does "social" mean?

Sidebar: An 8yr old (older?) issue was finally settled: "Gnu/Linux: Finally, it's really free software A Red Hat hacker's tenacity frees Gnu/Linux once and for all".

I left a big project y'day ... on the verge of leaving another today ... so was reading back into that stuff, just chillin', relaxing from one too many arguments in dev circles. I'm just sick of it.

Shows how folk can actually GTD if they choose to do that instead of just bickering.
So they dug through the crates and found the paper-trail

In the end they just did the legal paperwork and Sun re-licenced, is all. Just work ... just solutions to problems ...

Actually recoding with gpl code was considered at some points, but NFS ... problematic as it is ... who wants to take /that/ on?
And maybe debian is killing itself with their rigid all-free agenda ... but I still think there's a valid argument to be had.

But what's burning me up background is this: In my experience? people act as though they're allergic to straight questions. bug=181493 ... shows how nasty devs can be.

This is the first time in 2wks I'm not sitting in the xxxxxxx IRC channel. Just too ignorant ... self-satisfied / complacent ... the state of tech today.

We decided to talk about how xxxxxxx relates to general *nix community. A kind of free-swinging biatch session. Fine. Someone went on at length about how branches were killing the root.

I asked how what happens at branch propagates back to root ... up stream ... again and again ... no answer.
Replies? Oh sure, lots of replies, and energetic too ...
... shutup (just joking of course ... hilarious)
... poke with cattleprod ... repeatedly ... just joking, of course ... hilarious
"Stop and think" was nearly the best reply.

And answers? 0

Replies? many ... about 1/2 being "chill" and "time-out" ... because when asked what I was talking about I would repeat, "How does what happens at branch poison/kill the root?" as they were saying.

0 Answers

NB: just another day ... nothing special or unique here, entirely typical, and that's my point. Might be worse than '06 or '96 or '86 or '76, but only "typical".

So really their points wasn't GTD ... it was more "social". Does "snarf" ring bells? That used to be used to lable someone who was always digging at things to cause / widen splits.

And that's the social agenda: a sloppy sort of sneering good.old.boy self-congratulatory back-slapping that generates all sorts of heat but no light at all. Plain, simple, to the point questions are just not appropriate in that context.

State of tech today. Business? Business is "social". YR/YW

p.s. I reported a rather substantial failure to this group's forum, including a raft of details. The rather snotty / condescending / patronizing reply ignored the details, asked a totally irrelevant question (passive-aggresive sophistry is SOP) then requested a specific detail. I.e. the precise version of one module. "The most recent build" wasn't specific enough? Okie dokie. When I answered with the precise version (3 digits? 4?) the response was ... you ready for this? The response was total silence. Not even ACK. Just silence. So you can understand why I so often make reference to snotty yuppies' snotty kidz. Good simple questions don't get good simple Answers, and good simple Answers don't get replies. It's pathological, is whott. It ferr shurr ain't got shit to do with GTD.

Addendum: talking about different ways to share our work (someone wanted to kinda publish ideas in IRC; I suggested starting a wiki page) I again said I thought forums just ended up piles of out-dated stuff but that wikis aggregated ... chaotic and dynamic, but not random. The reply? "Goggledegook". That's what set the stage for "shutup" and cattle-prod.
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 1 comment