On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 11:27:55AM +0200, Dave Neary wrote: > > Carol Spears wrote: > > the letter has been deleted from the reply. maybe you could paste the > > email and be real clear about what i am missing. > > http://www.mail-archive.com/gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg11413.html > > > it is less than participating in a real exchange. it screws up > > threading. > > Is that my problem, or yours? I change the subject line usually - didn't > this time, since the subject was the digest. > if it is my problem, i only have it with digest responders. > > i believe that if you look at the letter i wrote again, you will see > > that i am asking nicely and with a little bit of humor that you work > > with a little more honesty. > > I missed that. So can you clarify, please, in what sense I'm being > dishonest? Also, if you could be very precise and explain to me why you > think that I am somehow making GNOME eat Wilber, that would be helpful. > the dishonesty would be found mostly in the realm where "politeness" and "competency" are confused. where professionalism excludes people who actually do things and are. i have gotten this sense or this feeling since the very beginning of this thread which is in another place in my inbox that the goal here is to make me angry and demand to go to boston. if you ask me to make a list of the ten places that i want to go to the most, that list would only contain one location. home. i want to go home. not to Boston, not to the next gnome koolaid tasting party -- to my home where i never actually wanted to leave from. there should be hundreds of people who can go to SIGRAPH and do better for GIMP than i can. possibly, these people have actually had the good fortune to have been managing their own lives for the last three or more years. i have the expectation that you and others working with things here have at least some familiarity with the community and a consistent presence. can you tell me clearly what is wrong with this expectation? > > how could this be aggressive? > > So - for clarification for my little brain: you're calling me dishonest, > incompetent, you're implying that somehow I'm stealing GIMP money (if > that's not the case, please explain what you mean by > Carol said: > > in fact, perhaps jimmac can find the time to make a tee shirt that > > states that wilber is dead. gnome can just steal gimps money and get it > > over with. > ) > i said that the letter contained no sign of competency and that since i was sure this was not the case, i asked for help to see it. that request was stripped from the reply. even now, there is no competency being shown other than the ability to politely say nothing and politely morph the communication. i think you are honestly doing that. i would like you to step up your honesty. i did not mean to suggest you were being dishonest, i was asking for stronger honesty. honesty, the original email -- it smelled like it was written by someone who had just paid a lot of money to go to one of those motivational speakers. i suggest that if you had written the same letter only after going to a concert or something, you would have seen the problems and the email would be different as it would have contained GIMP related content. > Now, in the light of all that, can you explain to me how that's not > aggressive? > oh the things i am writing are not aggressive at all. i am not stripping your emails. that is aggressive. aggressive is also to be found on your end of the emails, where the person replying tries to make the person with actual opinions look different and twist the original message. i am not practicing this type of aggression right now. for instance, in your plans, are there any GIMP people involved yet? carol _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
