Active Topics
-
Maemo repository (8)
to Community by Maemish - 6 hrs, 21 mins ago -
Porting apps to Leste (44)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by norayr - 10 hrs, 54 mins ago -
List of well performing apps on Leste (35)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by smatkovi - 3 days, 8 hrs ago -
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (13)
to SailfishOS by edp17 - 4 days, 6 hrs ago -
Sailfish OS for the Samsung Galaxy Note 4 (SM-N910C) - (treltexx) (79)
to SailfishOS by edp17 - 4 days, 6 hrs ago -
U-Boot for Nokia RX-51 with BootMenu (updated version 2012.10-rc3-1) (843)
to Alternatives by Arno_11 - 4 days, 11 hrs ago - more...
 |
|
2010-02-19
, 20:42
|
|
Posts: 3,159 |
Thanked: 2,023 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
@ Finland
|
#262
|
Originally Posted by fatalsaint
why are you speculating about the past then? that is something I dont get. it is easy to stick with the past -tone (as witnessed by jakiman imo).
Have you been reading any of my responses??? That is exactly what I have been doing.
Originally Posted by fatalsaint
where are your arguments? I think I argumented my version pretty well. I see zero valid counter-arguments here. "Little harsh" isn't one. yes this thread is more than little harsh, but with those words this thread probably would never appeared here anyway. that harshness is called risk&reward. when risk is high enough, there is no need for monitoring even because even with near zero probability the risk is unbearable and reward is really small anyway.
Little harsh. However some form of notice about "One account per person" or something would be a good idea.
__________________
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
 |
|
2010-02-19
, 20:44
|
|
Posts: 11,700 |
Thanked: 10,045 times |
Joined on Jun 2006
@ North Texas, USA
|
#263
|
There were valid counterarguments ossipena, particularly the matter of your suggestion being disproportionate to the crime.
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
| The Following User Says Thank You to Texrat For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2010-02-19
, 20:47
|
|
Posts: 3,428 |
Thanked: 2,856 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
|
#264
|
Originally Posted by ossipena
Yay Defensive...
where are your arguments? I think I argumented my version pretty well. I see zero valid counter-arguments here. "Little harsh" isn't one. yes this thread is more than little harsh, but with those words this thread probably would never appeared here anyway. that harshness is called risk&reward. when risk is high enough, there is no need for monitoring even because even with near zero probability the risk is unbearable and reward is really small anyway.
Anyway.
I was saying it's harsh telling people that if create a duplicate account they'll get permanently banned for all eternity with no hope of recovery.
So, assume for a minute I create an account with an email and never get activation or what have you.. either they or my email system is FUBAR'd at that time, and after a day or two I think maybe something is broke and so I create another one. I just created a duplicate.. should I get run out of the community before I even start?
Simply create a rule that says not to create duplicate accounts. That's all that's needed... punishment and/or criteria for what to do when people break the rules would be handled in a separate area, IMHO.
ETA: Plus what Tex said... Punishment <> Crime.
|
|
2010-02-19
, 20:51
|
|
Posts: 3,159 |
Thanked: 2,023 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
@ Finland
|
#265
|
Originally Posted by Texrat
i can't draw a line from "a little harsh" to that even how hard I try. what others were there then?
There were valid counterarguments ossipena, particularly the matter of your suggestion being disproportionate to the crime.
lets argument my solution further
1. why would one ever need two accounts?
2. how would punishment influence the will to create two accounts? (spoiler: the harder the punishment, ....)
3. who defines the proportions?
3.1 must the general tmo guidelines about multiaccount punishments be followed? really? those are for chitchatting, not software QA.
__________________
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
|
|
2010-02-19
, 20:53
|
|
Posts: 3,159 |
Thanked: 2,023 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
@ Finland
|
#266
|
Originally Posted by fatalsaint
you don't know how to send an email?
So, assume for a minute I create an account with an email and never get activation or what have you.. either they or my email system is FUBAR'd at that time, and after a day or two I think maybe something is broke and so I create another one. I just created a duplicate.. should I get run out of the community before I even start?
__________________
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
Last edited by ossipena; 2010-02-19 at 20:57.
|
|
2010-02-19
, 20:54
|
|
Posts: 3,428 |
Thanked: 2,856 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
|
#267
|
*sigh*
I can see this isn't going to get anywhere....
Please.. continue telling people they should be de-handed for swiping some bubble gum from a corner market.. I won't stop you.
I can see this isn't going to get anywhere....
Please.. continue telling people they should be de-handed for swiping some bubble gum from a corner market.. I won't stop you.
|
|
2010-02-19
, 20:59
|
|
Posts: 3,159 |
Thanked: 2,023 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
@ Finland
|
#268
|
Originally Posted by fatalsaint
I thought it would come to that by your original replies..... so I wont bother anymore because this is frustrating when you only keep dodging.
*sigh*
I can see this isn't going to get anywhere....
Please.. continue telling people they should be de-handed for swiping some bubble gum from a corner market.. I won't stop you.
__________________
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
|
|
2010-02-19
, 21:00
|
|
Posts: 968 |
Thanked: 974 times |
Joined on Nov 2008
@ Ohio
|
#269
|
There must be some community discussion in every case. I think we can agree that:
Developer A bypasses the QA system to make money faster is bad.
Developer B bypasses the QA system to steal passwords is much worse.
Developer C bypasses the QA system to brick devices is even worse.
Do they all get the same announcement "Developer bypassed the QA system and software has been removed."?
Or do Developers B and C get a more detailed announcement? So that the community is aware they were acting in a very anti-social manner?
I think, obviously B and C get a more detailed announcement. But where do we draw the line? We need the actions and consequences spelled out. But once you do that, it is easy to infer what the offense was based on the announcement. At that point you may as well detail it in the announcement to prevent speculation. And that brings us right back to this thread.
I'm not in favor of a public stoning, but the public must be aware of what is going on. If it is decided to punish developers behind closed doors, Extras (for me) will lose some of its' credibility as a "safe" repository.
Because unless I am part of a select group, I won't know if a developer/application has been reprimanded before and may fall victim to someone on their 2nd or 3rd .... transgression. If I know a particular developer has had issues in the past I may skip their applications or install and carefully evaluate them. But that is my choice, without that knowledge, my choice has been taken from me.
Yes, I take a chance installing anything from extras, or the other repositories, but again it is my INFORMED choice.
Last edited by lemmyslender; 2010-02-19 at 21:12. Reason: meant chance not choice in last sentence
Developer A bypasses the QA system to make money faster is bad.
Developer B bypasses the QA system to steal passwords is much worse.
Developer C bypasses the QA system to brick devices is even worse.
Do they all get the same announcement "Developer bypassed the QA system and software has been removed."?
Or do Developers B and C get a more detailed announcement? So that the community is aware they were acting in a very anti-social manner?
I think, obviously B and C get a more detailed announcement. But where do we draw the line? We need the actions and consequences spelled out. But once you do that, it is easy to infer what the offense was based on the announcement. At that point you may as well detail it in the announcement to prevent speculation. And that brings us right back to this thread.
I'm not in favor of a public stoning, but the public must be aware of what is going on. If it is decided to punish developers behind closed doors, Extras (for me) will lose some of its' credibility as a "safe" repository.
Because unless I am part of a select group, I won't know if a developer/application has been reprimanded before and may fall victim to someone on their 2nd or 3rd .... transgression. If I know a particular developer has had issues in the past I may skip their applications or install and carefully evaluate them. But that is my choice, without that knowledge, my choice has been taken from me.
Yes, I take a chance installing anything from extras, or the other repositories, but again it is my INFORMED choice.
__________________
*Consumer*, not a developer! I apologize for any inconvenience.
My script to backup /home and /opt
Samsung Galaxy S Vibrant, Huawei S7, N900(retired), N800(retired)
*Consumer*, not a developer! I apologize for any inconvenience.
My script to backup /home and /opt
Samsung Galaxy S Vibrant, Huawei S7, N900(retired), N800(retired)
Last edited by lemmyslender; 2010-02-19 at 21:12. Reason: meant chance not choice in last sentence
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to lemmyslender For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2010-02-19
, 21:02
|
|
Posts: 445 |
Thanked: 572 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Oxford
|
#270
|
Originally Posted by fatalsaint
Well, I think the obvious one is Debian. There are certainly people in leadership positions, but they're put there by the wider Debian community, and are accountable to that community. It's not always pretty - Debian mailing list flamewars are legendary - but it produces a top quality distribution, and one we're all running a derivative of.
Well...
I need an example of a successful Linux Distribution that does not have a central group of individuals primarily responsible for it's development.
Sure.. quite of a few of them take input from the community on direction.. but I don't think there's any where absolutely every change is voted on by every member of the community before implementation...
Last edited by jakiman; 2010-02-19 at 20:37.