On Thu, 2008-11-27 at 09:19 -0800, VDR User wrote: > On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 7:21 AM, Andy Walls <awalls@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-11-27 at 06:08 -0800, VDR User wrote: > >> Does anyone here actually disagree that the approach multiproto takes > >> is a great solution that should be adopted (if possible)? > > > > Does anyone here disagree that the above question is a troll? > > > > My point is that silence on internet mailing lists is not concurrence. > > > > This is especially the case if people are trying to avoid conflict by > > not reacting to people trolling for conflict. > > I hope you don't expect to be taken seriously after your absurd > comment. Derek, I never expected for that response to be taken at face value. It was to encourage reflection on the way your original question was phrased and to point out it's inability to get a conclusive answer. Also devoid of any fragments of the previous conversation in the thread, your original question can be construed as inflammatory (i.e. a troll). Even the most benign tone and intent won't always be conveyed in a written medium. > This conversation is about addressing and finding a solution > to a problem. I'm not even the person who originally brought up the > solution used in multiproto but as far as I can see, it does seem to > be a great solution so I question why that method shouldn't be > adopted. > It's ridiculous I need to point any of this out to you but one > possible reason is that _you_ are in fact the one trolling here. The first and third line of my response were crafted such that it could possibly be construed as a troll. A bit of irony I was hoping people would catch. > Afterall, the only posting you've made has absolutely nothing to do > with the subject, while all of mine do. > Please contribute something > relevant or find some other thread to infect. And I could say the same thing. Open ended survey questions that can't yield conclusive results, with no surrounding context in the message, and yet addressed to a wide audience (i.e. "anyone here") are not productive, IMO. I admire the passion you have about the state of v4l-dvb in your writings. So why can't I see that passion in your work? I'd encourage you to take that energy and passion you have and write some improvements, go through unit testing, and submit some patches. It's open source, you can make a difference - you can even author some of those differences. If you think it's broken, help us fix it. If you don't think you can write code yourself, find a friend who can help you. I echo your sentiment back to you whole-heartedly: please contribute! > And by the way, most of us have accepted the outcome of the > s2api/multiproto controversy. Maybe it's about time you find a way to > move on as well. Good luck to you. Who says I haven't moved on? My peeve is inflammatory and derisive comments and destructive criticism. These things weigh heavily on me when I see them. As CityK rightly guessed, your history of somewhat provocative comments in postings colored my opinion on your survey question with which I took issue. Without context, it appears to be just another in a series. Regards, Andy _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
