[logicprog]

That first link especially is hyperbolic disingenuous bad faith nonsense. It draws completely wild conclusions that simply don't follow from the GNOME dev quotes or GNOME's behavior it lists in its support. Trying to have a consistent coherent vision for their own project isn't the same as trying to lock users into their project, let alone trying to sabotage other people's projects, nor do they ever say that's what they want to do, or that they view users as "walking billboards", just that they want GNOME to have a consistent experience so they can have basic quality assurance. They're basically trying to avoid the "carrier customized Android" problem. I glanced briefly over the other articles and it seems like they're the same utter drivel, additionally repeating tiresome, worn out, utterly stupid and wrong claims like that GNOME is "a mobile-first" interface or "not suited to the desktop." I use nearly completely vanilla GNOME every day on my desktop, as a power user, and it's amazing --- far better, in fact, than KDE or any other DE I've tried. I've explained at length why, and why their UX choices were justified, before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39985533

[Affric]

I still prefer MacOS to GNOME. But KDE always just feels like a mess. And everyone's defence is that you can tidy it up any way you like?

There is value in that. GNOME and MacOS can sometimes feel like straight jackets. But you know, I would rather just not fiddle with the DE and actually get down to doing whatever it is I do. And KDE just doesn't give me that with the default experience.

GNOME works great 90% of the time as my DE. That's more than the 20% KDE has got for me.

[Intralexical]

> That first link especially is hyperbolic disingenuous bad faith nonsense. … I glanced briefly over the other articles and it seems like they're the same utter drivel… …I've explained at length why, and why their UX choices were justified, before…

Yep. There we go. Saying anything about GNOME that isn't adoring praise immediately draws out the victim-playing accusations of bad faith, and refusal to engage with the actual problems. How dare anybody scrutinize the way GNOME developers treat and conduct themselves around other people. Nobody can ask GNOME to listen to them, but everybody else must listen to GNOME. There's genuinely something strange going on with the mindset around the whole project; it's like they've actively weeded out anybody with any functioning empathy, self-awareness, or non-zero neuroplasticity…

It's not GNOME that's crazy; it's literally everybody else [1][2][3][4][5][6[][7][8][9][10] that's ever tried to work with GNOME! They must be out to get you.

---

1: Solus/Budgie — See second link above.

2: Linux Mint — https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=4149#comment-239629

https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-Mint-More-GNOME-Forks

> We want to send a strong signal upstream and towards other projects. We cannot and will not support applications which do not support our users and environments.

3: Transmission — https://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/3685

(Cited in first link, which you dismissed as "Hyperbolic disingenuous bad faith nonsense".)

4: System76 (as villified by GNOME) — https://www.theregister.com/2021/11/10/system76_gnome_deskto...

(Mentioned in second link, which again you dismissed as "utterly stupid and wrong" "utter drivel".)

5: SpaceFM — https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=687752

6: Inkscape developer — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFGXVN9dZ8U

> …you talk with people and you get an exasperated sigh, like "Why are you bothering to like report this issue to me?," or like "Why are you asking this question, it's stupid." It's a bit caustic.

7: Ubuntu (though diplomatic) — https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/ubuntu-desktop-gnome-plans-fo...

8: Wayland — https://old.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/hnoksv/comment/fxfax...

> They just skip "embrace" and "extend" and just go straight to "extinguish". …They don't just decline to implement standards, they actively work against the establishment of standards at all.

(Cited in the fourth link.)

9: Kernel (Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox) — https://itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/torvalds-pou...

> The gnome people have their problems. They do seem to like to blame pretty much anything but themselves.

10: Subsurface (Konstantin Bläsi) — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ON0A1dsQOV0&t=6m8s

> There is no way to get an answer. The only thing you can get is abuse.

It's literally endless.

[logicprog]

> It's not GNOME that's crazy; it's literally everybody else [1][2][3][4][5][6[][7][8][9][10] that's ever tried to work with GNOME! They must be out to get you.

You're just Gish galloping to make yourself feel better. A lot of people being angry with a project doesn't actually necessarily imply that that project is inherently the bad guy. That's bandwagon thinking: "if the majority of people agree with me, then I must be right."

It can also just indicate a set of expectations that have become culturally ingrained and common in the community — like the idea that open source projects have some kind of obligation to bend over backwards to satisfy every whim of downstream developers and users, even when it conflicts with the upstream developer's vision for their own project — that clash with the beliefs and values of the project "everyone" is getting frustrated with. It can also indicate a culture of groupthink and bandwagoning and mob mentality, where everyone decides they're going to hate on a project and it becomes a self reinforcing cycle. Or it can just mean that the project in question just isn't really meant to be taken and adapted by other projects, because it's its own product, not a tinker toy kit, and so everyone is mad at it because they're expecting it to be something it isn't and hasn't been for over a decade, just because people want to takw advantage of the free labor of the GNOME team in building their product while also having their every whim satisfied. (IMO Miny and System76 have the right idea — fork GNOME or build something totally else — maybe set up a consortium of distros to manage a common GNOME fork? — if you don't like GNOME being GNOME).

I read through, in their entirety, every source you cite up to and including source 5, which I think is more than fair of me considering the Gish Gallop you're trying to put over on me, and all I see are meaningless petty grievances over minor design disagreements due to the entitlement of downstream developers, mostly about meaningless things like app indicators and themes, where everyone wants GNOME to conform to their vision of the next desktop and not their own just for their convenience. None of it seems like a smoking gun to justify hyperbolic claims of GNOME trying to sabotage other project's products out of a desire for market gain or something, or being "just like Microsoft" or anything else, unless you think the very idea of a DE or other project wanting to have its own vision and stick to it is illegitimate, in which case you should be railing against Void Linux for not using systemd, Alpine for not using glibc by default, DWM for not having themes and extensions, etc etc etc. But you don't.

And it's very interesting to me that when System76 displays similar behavior to the GNONE team, like when The GNOME team offered to make some of their extensions part of upstream so they'd get maintained by upstream by default, but pointed out that TypeScript didn't really work with GJS (I've read S76's source code, to get it to work it requires an ad hoc see script), and asked System 76 to consider rewriting the extension, and System 76 refused, or System 76 refusing to work with and accept the firmware standard that everyone was unifying on, you consider this evidence of the vilification of systems of the six, and not evidence of bad behavior on their part.

Or the transparent double standard you display between distro developers and upstream gnome developers, where the distro developers flatly refusing to align with and integrate with the vision of the Upstream project whose work they are picking backing off of is viewed as totally fine it accepted, but gnome refusing to align themselves with the vision of the people downstream from then is somehow evil, when it seems just about equal to me.

And honestly I genuinely do not see the problem with gnome being able to make design decisions about their own fucking desktop however they want, and asking distros to please stop doing the shit Android oems do to Android to gnome and randomly see me and slapping on all kinds of cruft and extensions from the "factory". Also, the idea that the police stop theming post was meant to be a directed targeted dig at System 76 is just utterly nonsensical and overly sensitive, and the fact that you can't see that I think demonstrates what's going on here. There are far many more, much larger, downstream projects that theme. Also, before you raise it, seeming isn't really any better supported on KDE than it is under GNOME, it can break things just as easily, the KDE devs just don't care (which is fine).

> There's genuinely something strange going on with the mindset around the whole project; it's like they've actively weeded out anybody with any functioning empathy, self-awareness, or non-zero neuroplasticity…

But I see you opened with needless insults and generalizations, so I don't think this conversation is going to go anywhere productive. I recommend you go touch grass.

[Intralexical]

Tell me more how GNOME are the real victims, and calling out the way y'all treat people is "Gish Galloping" "needless insults and generalizations" and "meaningless petty grievances". Words mean things, you know, and other people exist.

You hit 4 kilobytes in this defensive rant. And not a single word of empathy for anything you apparently don't personally identify with, not a single thought reflecting on the impact your conduct has on other people. Not a single spot of introspection wondering "Are we really right"?

....It really is endless, isn't it....?

[logicprog]

I think I'm done being a footstool for you to grandstand about what a great person you are from. You can find a different dance partner to virtue signal with.

[Intralexical]

I suppose I should be unsurprised that you would pretend that's what it's about. Assume everybody's as selfish and disingenuous as you, yeah.

[logicprog]

Perhaps you should do some introspection yourself into whether you are demonstrating empathy for people you don't personally identify with, neuroplacticity in defending your arguments, or the capacity to think about whether you might be wrong, by actually engaging with other people's reasons for not finding your evidence convincing, instead of merely assuming that all Right Thinking People would automatically agree with you. And then immediately resorting to abuse as soon as someone doesn't find your evidence as convincing as you apparently find it. Because that's what you did. Instead of explaining why the evidence you gave me was actually good, you just resorted to immediately abusing me and assuming I must be a terrible person for disagreeing with you. How dare I challenge your interpretation and valuation of the behavior and quotes given in your sources, right? Perhaps you should consider how your abusive[1] behavior impacts others.

[1]: https://psychcentral.com/disorders/narcissistic-projection

[soundnote]

I don't think five examples is a gish gallop: the point was to demonstrate a trend in GNOME behavior, you need multiple examples to have a believeable case at all.

[logicprog]

Five isn't but fifteen begins to feel like one, because the only practical way to respond is to read the sources and give your own high level conclusions, the same way the person who gave them is doing, but then you'll be accused of not dealing with specifics, and then if you deal with some specifics but not all of them, you'll be accused of not dealing with all of the facts, and so on.

[Intralexical]

I.E.: The more evidence and examples I bring, the more you feel the need to accuse me of speaking in bad faith.

> but then you'll be accused of not dealing with specifics, and then if you deal with some specifics but not all of them, you'll be accused of not dealing with all of the facts, and so on.

Frankly, I think that's a description of what you were apparently attempting to do. For me, it was about the pattern, the damage to communities, and the immediate aggression with which you yourself responded.

You already know you must be right. You just need everybody else to also agree that you are right. How dare I bring pesky reality into the fold.

[logicprog]

> immediate aggression... You already know you must be right. You just need everybody else to also agree that you are right. How dare I bring pesky reality into the fold.

How nice of you to describe yourself :)

Dude, I looked at the evidence you gave me precisely because I thought I might be wrong, and didn't find your description or evaluation of it at all accurate or convincing, and I explained why, and instead of dealing with my reasons you immediately began to abuse me because you assumed that all right thinking empathetic people must agree with you. Like, I absolutely did deal with your facts, I read through many of your sources and gave you a description of why I don't find them convincing, what more do you want me to do, go through them quote by quote? That's precisely what I mean by a Gish gallop. The problem isn't the sheer number of sources, it's the way you're using them to infinitely increase the granularity of the discussion, so that the rhetorical burden on me just expands indefinitely and you can always bring up a new thing and say I haven't dealt with it.

[kingspact]

GIDF right on cue, sir.