|
From the thread linked, it looks like the primary issue is that there's just too much fighting. It's not that people disagree (although they do), it's that the disagreement means constant war: arguing about the plan's legitimacy, the insistence that he justify everything to someone, respond to them in detail (on Twitter!), read their preferred set of emails on the matter, on demand whenever the aggressor wants, in forums like Twitter not appropriate for this discussion -- and that he expects to be punished with demands for this attention, continually, and thus have no peace. If the maintainer says "no, please, leave me alone," he will not be left alone. His legitimacy in seeking peace is denied, his motives are questioned, his plan described as nefarious, ("hatched in secret"), ill will be spoken of him behind his back, and so on. This is an asymmetrical exchange that wears someone down over time. |