2013/3/25 Cedric Greevey <cgree...@gmail.com> > Another minute, another straw man. My point is that the needed video > hosting capability already exists (and even has monetize options). >
You are great at identifying logical fallacies in other's arguments. You are not so great at remembering your own lines of argument (which makes it easy for you to avoid formal logic errors). E.g. a few posts ago, you told Alex, that his costs were too high and proceeded to pull a complete bill of expenses out of your ears. I want to point out that this is very insensitive and insulting, in case you were not aware of that fact. Now you tell us, that we should not reinvent all the wheels (so no cam volunteers? awww), that it's just about the hosting platform (whose millions of users we supposedly could magically attract, by just being there). That tells me that either you were manipulating the whole conversation, by making big claims and "generously" reducing them to just the hosting platform. The alternative is that you are lying now, and your argument was not just about hosting. So if you have some secret agenda please make your intentions transparent. The third option, of course, is that you just throw stuff at the mailing list and see what sticks, without thinking it through. This is how I actually see you, given the benefit of doubt, in case you wondered. > I don't get it. The thread got complaints that the videos were being > produced slowly and inefficiently, yet as soon as someone actually > suggested ways to potentially make the process faster and more efficient, > practically *everyone* leapt to the defense of those same slow and > inefficient methods that they'd previously complained about. I guess > abstract kvetching is okay, but concrete suggestions are frightening > because they might *actually lead to change* or something. Although that > still doesn't explain why someone then had the gall to criticize *me* for > not making concrete and constructive suggestions, when that's exactly what > I *did* do after *other people* had merely complained without making any > suggestions. > No! Your suggestions are either trivial or inexecutable, akin to the CEO micromanaging a floor coder. They are not constructive (for lack of constructing an alternative that hasn't been thought of by the people who actually make it happen). They are concrete, I will give you that. I also admit, that the alternative with volunteers and magic software, you envision frightens me, but not because I consider it realistic. > Of course, I don't really *need* to argue anymore, because someone else > helpfully pointed out that an existing conference already does a better > job: pycon. That completely disproves the entire class of arguments along > the lines of "making *conference proceedings* videos is somehow some sort > of a special case and it HAS to be slow and expensive!", of which we've > seen several, sadly including some *after* pycon was first mentioned. > Well now you are the CEO yelling at his coders: "But the other company does it better" Without doing your CEO job and finding out what makes them better and how their processes could be applied. -- Cedric, seriously, I wish of all the time I took now to address your inane temper tantrums (which includes reading and thinking about them), I had taken just a tenth to praise actually constructive people in this community and/or contributing myself. I won't ask you to shut up or go away, because often I see you making meaningful posts. But if you will grant me one wish: From now on, if three people or more disagree with you in a thread, refrain from posting any more and proceed to discuss in personal emails or chat. And yes, we all know that being disagreed with stings. Sucking it up is a skill aswell. And the next time you feel the need to suggest improvements to a process, that's out of your control, show some respect for the people in charge and acknowledge that they might already have thought of the things you are proposing. Even a very formal disclaimer can make all the difference in the world. All that said (again): ========================================================== Big thanks to Alex and his team for making those wonderful conferences happen and for providing videos! I wish I could find a way to express the full extent of my gratitude without making everyone feel awkward. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
