Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
> "Larry Qualig" <lqualig@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> >> at the same time the charter should advise strongly against complaints
> >> about linux.. this is not a group for complaining about linux, but
> >> rather it's promotion.
> >
> > Doesn't the charter say that this newsgroup is for *discussing* Linux
> > and how it compares to other operating systems? If so, then why bury
> > your head in the sand and only discuss one side of the OS (only the
> > good) while pretending the other side doesn't exist?
>
> I hate to say so, but I agree with Larry.
It's a back-handed compliment but hey.... I'll take what I can get.<g>
Wouldn't it be great if everyone (as in 'everyone') acted on the
intellectual/factual merits of posts rather than coming in with the
attiude of "If this persons makes a post I must agree and if that
person wrote the post I must disagree."
> A bunch of guys sitting around agreeing with one another on how great
> Linux is doesn't sound like discussion to me.
Unfortunately most people react very, very poorly to criticism of any
kind when often it can be a positive thing. For example, when doing
your oral defense of your thesis or dissertation the panel is unlikely
to sit there and praise you how great you are. They ask tough
questions and try to poke holes in your hypothesis but it's done for a
positive reason.
When a researcher publishes a paper it is often met with criticism.
It's not because researchers all hate each other, rather because
finding flaws and inconsistencies is what eventually betters the
research community as a whole.
Let's take this to the (absurd) extreme and it's obvious how this would
be detremental to Linux and OSS if everyone behaved this way. Nobody
would file bugs because it would point out mistakes. People wouldn't
ask for feature requests because it reveals short-comings and
limitations in apps. If everyone simply pretended that everything was
always perfect there really wouldn't be much progress made.
Open and honest dialog is what leads to progress... not denial and the
refusal to cope with reality. Otherwise this group would become the
Linux equivalent of Red China and its censorship policies where only
pro-government articles are allowed to exist.
|
|
