Let's un-hijack this thread

[xennex81]

Why shouldn't it be? I for one, don't wish to keep kmail running all the time, but I'd still want to get notified of new mails (so I can fire up kmail to read 'em)...of course defaults are just that, defaults you can change to fit your preferences.

No, defaults matter.

Because you'll need to find the option first before you can know it is only a default, which means it is extra work (it is extra work regardless).

Normally (in a normal system) the application has a visual indication of going into the background (which is a system tray icon) in the sense of keeping the application running (but without a window). Ideally you'd do something like what akonadi does (only it is done too much--) and without visual indication, that is, there should definitely be some visual indication that a backend is still running, but it shouldn't be as big and prevalent as what akonadi apparently is, including the fact that it uses mysql (instead of sqlite, like what every other application does). Most applications with local databases use sqlite, only for web (to my knowledge) is mysql typically used (as part of the LAMP stack).

I even install lighttpd so I don't need to install apache for my dokuwiki, which also has its own database (since it stores files in plaintext). And then another application *does* install it (or mysql) which renders the whole choice a bit worthless.

But typically what you want is at least a visual indication that something is running not some ghost appearance which means you were never in control.

[kubicle]

No, defaults matter.
Because you'll need to find the option first before you can know it is only a default, which means it is extra work (it is extra work regardless).

Sure, but this is true whatever the default actually is. People who wish to change the default will always have to figure out the default can be changed. It doesn't matter what the default is in this regard.

including the fact that it uses mysql (instead of sqlite, like what every other application does)

akonadi has backends for sqlite (and for postgresql) if one prefers...mysql is again just the default.

[xennex81]

Sorry, I kept editing, you are fast.

That's why the default is important because it must be good. You can count on that the majority of users would turn it off if they were educated, which makes it a bad default causing endless hours of unneeded work for annoyed users.

That is typically what's the case in the linux world: bad defaults and what turns a good application into a bad one. Some of these choices end up as non-negotiable options and then the application really goes in a bad direction.

To know the good defaults you must listen to your users which you just had a chance or opportunity for (the user told you what works, no guesswork required) and not end up as arrogant developers who don't listen to end-users because they know it all from their perspective.

So this causes time lost: end-users are having to do what developers won't do because they are arrogant and know better.

It is a bad distribution of work and a waste of time and energy: an end-user can never do what a developer can do, what a developer is in the position to do.

And this is the bad distribution that takes place in the Linux world because end users are treated as developers (they need to start changing stuff) while developers are treated as users (they have no responsibility to change things).

[kubicle]

You're (again) needlessly confrontational...people have different ideas of what are good/bad defaults. These are not decided by your opinion (or mine for that matter).

If you wish to rant about defaults or akonadi or linux or whatever, please start your own thread rather than hijack someone else's support thread.

[xennex81]

No (again sorry) they are decided by the majority of users for which there is no ear. You just think you can get away with not listening to the user by saying that "no one is stopping you" and so on, and I am again told to shut my mouth because I say something that is unwelcome while you disrespect all those users. But if that's the way to do it then I won't use this software or that software at all, if I can only use it as long as I don't defend my interests as a user. You are allowed to say anything but me, no. Sorry, I'm fed up with it. I'm fed up with life in general ;-).

I was told I can be free as long as I honour certain agreements and that seems to be the case here too.

Why not once accept that the things I say have merit? That's the one thing you won't do. I can talk to endless users on IRC (new users) and they agree with me, only invested people don't. Wake up! What I say has merit. Listen to it, for once, in stead of politely telling me to shut my ****ing mouth (to go elsewhere, every time someone says something meaningful he needs to go elsewhere to say it). They do it on IRC, they do it here and it's all jealousy and also cynicism. Here is someone who says things can be improved and you don't listen to it because you don't wanna hear that improvement is necessary. I'm even showing the way and you could honour that but instead I get breakdowns much the same way Riddel got his. It's the same culture, remember? They didn't want him to disagree, said he was too confrontational. He and I are alike, use the same measure of doing things. But this culture is entrenched in not hearing what is true so his objections were denied because it was not polite enough. How much time do you want me to spend in changing the perspectives of people if I cannot even be allowed to speak? Anything that is frivolous or happy is denied and redirected to #offtopic, no laughter allowed. This was within minutes of me entering #kubuntu or #devel for the first time, how friendly is that? Sour people sit in a channel telling other people not to have fun even if nothing other is going on. For the logs? For the channel logs. It's incredible.

edit:

Meanwhile anyone who asks a sincere question in #kubuntu is not even given a reply, you can go to a midday or afternoon of channel logs and there are 4 or 5 different questions and no replies and no other chat either. The channel is full of people but when someone actually chats even about Riddell he is redirected away because it might scare users away who come to ask sincere questions.... that are not answered.

[kubicle]

You can state your opinion if you wish, but these forums are not your personal playground so do it on your own thread, not on someone else's support thread.

When dbaker asked a support question, he's probably looking for an answer, not your rants or debate of whether the linux developers suck or not...just an answer to his question.

And you should stop saying that developers should listen to users when you actually mean that developers should listen to you (you're simply not qualified to declare what users want without actual studies or user data, you're only qualified to say what you want).

[xennex81]

I can see perfectly fine you are not listening to this user, I don't need studies for that (by people who also don't listen to users?) and by this user I mean the current user who asked the question and gave the feedback. You don't honour his feedback. You don't express gratitude at his feedback. You just overrule it with your own opinion ("Why shouldn't it be?"). You didn't even ask "Why should it be" -- this would have conformed to the sentence structure. Instead of answering his positive (suggestion for change) you answered it as an attack on your positive (the current default) which it wasn't even which means you were defending an ego position. Furthermore, you are again telling me to shut up. Second, the user's question was already answered and this is on-topic. I have no playground of my own and I need others' (mine even get locked when I am assaulted in them). Third, you are speaking on behalf of this user (again, ..) putting words in his mouth. I did not need to put words in his mouth because he /EXPRESSED/ himself (it's THERE). He gave you his opinion and it coincides with mine so I am speaking FOR the user and WITH the user, YOU are superseding the user with your own opinion ("Why shouldn't it be, I for one...") immediately replacing that user's suggestion with your own thereby not hearing him and denying him (that's how it feels, at least, to me, and I am pretty emphatic). So who is speaking on behalf of who and who is putting words is whose mouth?? Ask yourself that. You are accusing me of what you're doing yourself. "he's probably looking for an answer, not your rants or debate or...". Who told you that's his opinion? You are projecting, not I.

Further, you use two denigrating qualifications immediately ("rant" and "hijack") as to my response, immediately disrespecting me and you go on with this ("playground", "rant"). Who is being disrespectful here?

I think it's fair to say I'm not the culprit here, but you are. Maybe you should stop making such remarks (I am being polite here) and not disrespecting me with that soft seemingly polite language to "go elsewhere". It's not polite okay. It's harassment.

[xennex81]

You are basically harassing me here, constantly telling me to shut my mouth.

What they've done with Riddell and what you're doing yourself. Meanwhile Riddell shrugs at it, maybe you should too.

[kubicle]

Please don't put words in my mouth, I never said my opinion of the defaults is the correct one. I simply stated that there is no "correct" default as my view is different that his. I wouldn't complain if the default was something else either. There are plenty of defaults I disagree with, but I understand that other people may prefer them (and not declare that my preferences are the correct ones like you do).

Who told you that's his opinion?

That's why I said "probably", if he disagrees with my view, I'm fine with that.

Anyway, I'm done with you once again.

[xennex81]

I have never said that my preferences are the correct ones, I have never even stated my preferences regarding this one, which would indeed be according to the user, but with a caveat, the one I have stated. My opinion was not a single-minded yes/no opinion, I gave /reasons/. You can take them as they are, you don't need to follow them, but it requires you to listen and be open (it's an auditory technique) ;-). Sorry, that was disparaging, the way you have been to me. But with tongue in cheek. And of course there are better defaults, this nihilism serves no one. At least there are defaults that more people would like, if that is your criterium. I just happen to think I have a better eye for these things because I look out for them, it's something I do -- you could do the same, if you had an interest.

And it is not about his disagreement, but you were using it as a leverage (to shut me up). I don't like it when you do these things, I really don't. Please don't do them anymore.

[kubicle]

And it is not about his disagreement, but you were using it as a leverage (to shut me up).

Not once have I told you to shut up, not once.

I don't like it when you do these things, I really don't. Please don't do them anymore.

You can be sure of that. I'll add you to my ignore list, so I won't see your posts anymore.

[SteveRiley]

xennex81, you need to stop this behavior now. Take this as an official notice: if you can't learn to control your temper, if you can't stop using this forum to lash out at all those with whom you disagree, if you can't set your hyperbolic criticism aside, then you will find yourself without a voice here.

[xennex81]

I am already without a voice here Steve.

I respect you very much but it is clear that whenever I voice a disagreeing sentiment, or a sentiment other people disagree with, I am instantly told to take it elsewhere.

This happened in IRC instantly when I was not disagreeing to anyone, merely meeting a new person and engaging in a bit of chat. We were instantly told (by Lordievader) to take it elsewhere.

Since the very beginning I have been told to take it elsewhere. Yes, mr. Kubicle, that is telling people to shut up. You can that hyperbolic criticism Steve? I'm sorry, it affects people.

When you tell someone time and time again to take his conversation elsewhere, that is a way to shove him off. That is not hyperbolic. That is telling someone to go elsewhere.

So, from the very beginning I have been told to go elsewhere on almost every occasion.

First it was kubuntu-offtopic. I could not have a bit of chat in kubuntu-devel.

Later on it was many times I believe in #kubuntu. The moment someone chats a bit too much he is instantly told, they do it amongst themselves as well, to take it to another channel.

Sometimes half of what is being said, is about people needing to take it to another channel. That is not hyperbolic, that is fact. On rare occasions, this 'exaggeration' is fact.

What do you want? Do you want to usher people out all the time? That is what is happening time and time again. I cannot even call someone a bully or my thread gets locked. A person who tells me my contributions are meaningless, that my sentiments are too frail, that my words are empty. That is allowed here. This kind of behaviour is allowed here.

You are allowed to tell a person off for no reason. And then when it doesn't go as planned they instantly put you on an ignore list. You are constantly told that your "rants" are not welcome (that is not hyperbole, that is literal words). You are told that people are not waiting for it, when it is an individual person making that statement and they cannot speak for a random visitor or contributor. You are told that you are "hijacking a thread" when you voice something about the topic at hand that is not agreeable to the one making that statement.

I am constantly offended here. You are constantly offending, not you perse Steve, others. Mr. Mike. I told him (and others) about how 'sentimental' things, or sensitive concerns, are not listened to, and he tells me right in my face that my concerns are too sensitive. I cannot voice anything here that is at least mildly critical of the linux world. Anything. Anything I voice, is rejected, denied.

I see it when the topic is about Windows vs. Linux. People are Windows fans and Microsoft lovers, and they are effected by fanboyism, and they are against linux. But when someone is in favour of linux, all of those "bad" characteristics no longer come into play, it is all nice and shine from that point on. That is really troubled thinking. Anything critical is NOT allowed to be voiced.

In the chat, nothing out of hand, ... what more do I need to say? It was in the chat, someone had made a disparaging remark about Kubuntu or Linux. About the lack of good software. He was instantly told that a person who was in #kubuntu-offtopic (this was the current channel) was expected to "know better". It's all us and wannabe-us. You can't say *anything* critical of Linux or you are attacked. You are called denigrating things.

I thought this forum and community was different, sure. But I still need to voice my opinions. If something is amiss, I need to be able to say it. But I'm not. Not here. Not in the IRC channels. It is not allowed. I can't say what's amiss. Not a single time have I gotten away with it. Not even now. The guy just says he puts me on ignore. Boy, what a grown-up way of dealing with it.

Seriously, are you all children? Every time a little bit of adverse sentiment against linux is being uttered you go all up in defenses. Or attack, mostly. There is simply a lot amiss in the linux world. And I want to be able to speak about it. I want to. Be able. To speak about it. And every time I am rejected. Always there is someone who makes disparaging attacks on me. You can call that hyperbolic, but it is not nice and it happens every time. This is not a platform for open discussion.

This is a place where Linux fanboys arise, apparently. Very cynical, and very jealous. Mostly. Steve, you are a bit more mature I believe, certainly more than me.

And I haven't had a bad time here, but seriously. This needs to change.

I don't know why you put up with this yourself, but as long as you voice something that's in line with the common sentiment, you're fine.

I am telling you: I am lashed out at constantly in that "polite" manner. Move the chat to offtopic. Start your own thread. That gets locked. Because I call someone a bully, and he is. The stuff he tells me is allowed, even though it is much more disrespectful and much more dishonest.

Agreeableness is favoured above honesty. I have been at many forums and it is quite common that such a sentiment exists, but... and I've also been in forums where every other thing I said was attacked by jealous people. I still held it out for at least 4 years there. Always critical people. Never supportive, and the ones who called themselves my friends were always silent when I was under fire. I was always home alone defending myself. Sure, I lash out. I think it is in order that I do. I have to go soon though. Sorry.

You call this my temper, and you call this lashing out at those I disagree with from my side. But I watch while all kinds of disrespectful behaviour are perpetrated against me. What then, do you want. To keep silent? While time and time again my conversation is shut down in those subtle and polite manners.

You can effectively shut someone down in a very mild and subtle way. And it is still as effective, or even more so, because you escape the radar screen yourself.

They don't tell you "I want you to stop making this conversation" or "I want you to shut up about this" but it is all the same and much more devious. It is called "civilised" but it is anything but.

Let me rephrase what happened in the beginning of this thread for me. I used to word "arrogant" to describe a sentiment of a certain attitude that developers have towards linux users. This was instantly met with "If you wish to rant about defaults or akonadi or linux or whatever, please start your own thread rather than hijack someone else's support thread.". I was told I am needlessly confrontational. Apparently, he or other people are the ones who decide whether and how needful it is.

So without any real argument or content to the words, I was told to shut up. I was not told why I was needlessly, confrontational. It was just made as a statement. I can tell you Riddell faced exactly the same. It is this sentiment. But the worst is the way the counterposition was framed.

people have different ideas of what are good/bad defaults. These are not decided by your opinion (or mine for that matter).

This is like saying that no truth can be found, nothing universal can be known. It is a very nihilist statement to make. This is basically saying that, no matter how hard we try, we can never learn anything about what makes good software, because something universal that works for anyone, can not be had. It is a good way to stifle and nullify anybody who DOES have an idea that thing can be IMPROVED. You are basically saying "improvement is impossible, don't even try."

It is completely nihilist. It is very cynical, even sarcastic. It is most deeply cynical. Someone comes up with very well founded opinions on whether and how something could be improved. I detail how it could be better and what needed or needs to change for that. Instantly someone tells me in some 'civilized' way that improvement is impossible because no universal good defaults could ever be found anway.

Another part of the story is that you are then quickly told (not this time, yet) that "if you want to have an influence, do some work yourself". Meaning, as a bystander (or USER) you can have your opinion but it won't have an effect until you get your hands dirty.

Meaning, opinions are not listened to. I try to make constructive remarks about the software or the community (even) and how it could be improved, but I am constantly met with nihilist cynical statements. That's a real good way to shut someone down. Perhaps you would then say "be the polite one, take it elsewhere, go elsewhere where you ARE appreciated." But it's not for me to do that without a fight, without at least a try to make it work.

And that's what I'm doing here, all this time. Trying to make it work. But my work is rejected, my remarks are rejected. Only Tom_ze_cat was meaningful, and open, and able to listen, and willing to make conversation instead of constantly making the other wrong. Just one person who doesn't do that, and instantly you have a good topic.

Listen. LISTEN. I can't (I cannot) talk about stuff in a normal way if this normal talk is always met with words that are meant to disparage or dissuade. What constantly happens is dissuation.

You may not feel it but it happens. I get mad about it, yes. I want to talk about fun and interesting things, and they are not allowed. "I never said that they were not allowed" no but the words you have used had the effect of stifling conversation and nullifying what was said in the eyes and ears of others. Even in a private chat saying those things would quickly stifle the conversation.

And if that then is the public opinion and also what is being respected by the moderators. Then I have no place here. Thank you. Goodbye. But if good manners have some role to play here, then please. Look at yourself or the ones doing it. Finally someone backs off from attacking me, but puts a stab at it in the last message "put you on ignore". Another way to subtle attack.

It is children here. You are treating me like children. Only grown-up, polite children. Still doing the same stuff. Not just honouring and respecting someone in what he tries to do. No, always. That same. Nihilist. Cynical. Can't improve. Has no use. No one would agree. No good default could be found. And then if in retrospect or in return I call that "arrogant" I am suddenly an offender.

Please.

This is so childlike. And I can know, because I am one. I just kissed a girl. 57. More like 45, in her heart. Me. 25 in my heart. I was in a good mood and I still am. But I just cannot go on like this. Every time I am being denied, pushed back.

Make of it what you will. Apparently our ways part here. But that means I also part from Kubuntu, sooner or later, because I won't be wasting my time on it.

For now I will just be keeping to myself here and not voicing anything critical of linux anymore, if I can. Just keeping it to practical matters then. The way everyone else does, apparently, except for WoodSmoke ;-).

But seriously. People must be allowed to voice negatives. You are afraid of negative emotions. I am not, not so much. But there is a strong fear of negative emotions. A negative must be allowed to be voiced, or you will never reach the positive that is behind it.

(They are already calling me on my phone to ask where I am staying ;-). Need to go. See you later). Bye.

As a sidenote this is how factual disagreement (about information, or content, or topics) turns into moral superiority, because now a factual disagreement is voiced as being a fault in moral character. So my disagreements with factual natures of topics, my disagreement with the factual matter at hand, is told by others to me as being my fault in my moral character. I am not polite. I have tempers. This is a way to stifle opposition. It is what happened to Riddell. Precisely that. See it for what it is. Please. It affects the whole community. When you disagree, you are told you are not polite enough. When you disagree, you are told that you are too confrontational. When you disagree, you are told you are breaking the Code of Conduct.

Please, just see it for what it is. It is these kind of oppositions that were voiced against Riddell, and they can't really back it up.

[Snowhog]

xennex81 -

First and foremost, Kubuntu Forums . Net is a Kubuntu linux "Support" forum. It exists so that users of Kubuntu linux have a place they can come and ask for assistance when needed, and provide assistance as they are able. We are very lenient, but we do have limits. We are aware that not everyone who uses Kubuntu linux does so without problems. Those of us here genuinely want to help (as we are able), but the helping process needs to involve the person desiring the help. We ask for information to better help identify the problem(s) so that the proper help might be identified.

If all one wants to do is to vent frustration, they must accept that doing so 'may' result in stepping on some ones toes, and those toes may respond accordingly. We have, do, and will, admonish 'any' member we feel has 'stepped over the line'.

[NickStone]

I find it a bit ironic that two of the Americans on the forum are not wanting someone else to have their say when in the "land of the free" free speech is part of their constitution / law.