| > However, it’s important to be kind to other humans and to treat humans with respect. Very true. But why is that argument never deployed against the bullies? Chrome's developers say "We want to do X". People say "No, please don't." Chrome says "I'm not going to respect your wishes." Where's the equality in that? > Now it can be difficult to voice opposition without coming off as rude but its definitely an important skill for a professional to have. The same is also true of people making those proposals. Chrome devs should know (from bitter experience) that releasing a high-handed statement, studiously ignoring all dissent, and then swinging the ban-hammer is going to lead to ill-will. Again, why isn't anyone calling for them to be more calm and respectful of the people they're hurting? > I wouldn’t want to wish that on anyone. I've been on the receiving end and - yes - it sucks. But given that they know these proposals would be contentious, why didn't they approach this in a more respectful and collaborative manner? |
How would you expect equality in an arrangement where you have a few hundred to a few thousand very specific kind of people producing something for billions?
They are in a special position. Every time you depend on someone to do something for you you cannot perform yourself, either due to a time or any other constraint, that is no longer an equal relationship, and it cannot be. You can make it codependent at best, which is not the same, and doesn't apply here.
All the licensing and open collaboration theatrics are just that, "words on a piece of paper" and things that can go away. I feel people really misjudge the "power" they "gain" from "open" and "transparent" processes like this.