Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

About a month ago I had a mechanic call me pissed and tell me they didn't want to work with me anymore if I didn't trust them. I had been asking questions over text.

That this happened is a statement of fact.

I'm taking my old ford explorer over to him this weekend. Do you know why?

Because I asked him what was wrong and explained the intent of the questions. We've had a working relationship for over 2 years, he was obviously having a bad day. No harm, no foul, humans are humans.

And yet, his negative behavior is a statement of fact. Imagine if I then went around town telling everyone not to use this man because he "doesn't play well with others". I mean, it's only a statement of fact, right?

Point of fact, the engine light in the truck came on earlier this week, I called him up and then drove it over so he could check codes (O2 sensor needs replacing). Had a conversation with him, where he told me his wife is living in Arizona to be a live-in baby sitter for their kids new baby, and he drives over there every other weekend (I knew his wife was in Arizona, but didn't know why).

You're campaigning against a piece of software because you don't like the author. Not for technical reasons, but because the author "forced" (your words) stuff onto other people, then after these innocents reverted it back in defense of the whole of fediverse and he got mad and said mean stuff, so now we need to defend the reader (me, and everyone else) from his meanness.

If you say so.



I feel like this is personal for you somehow and I don't know why. I'm not "campaigning" against anything, I posted one comment on a message board. Let's try to avoid bringing hysteria into the conversation.

I'm glad you ended up having a working relationship with your mechanic but I don't think it's really relevant here. Your mechanic is not maintaining an open source project. He's fixing your car. Which is a great solo project.

I think you're confused about my perspective so let me be clear: I'm not concerned with "defending" the reader from "meanness". I'm suggesting that investing in any project run by a single person is risky: more than likely if that person quits then the project is dead. That's strike one. The fact that the single author has a history of being combative with open source collaborators suggests it might be harder for the project to ever move beyond being a solo project. That's strike two.

All of this is just common sense. I'm sorry if it rubs you the wrong way. If your mechanic decides to stop maintaining your car in the future there will be hundreds of other mechanics waiting to take the job (and, importantly, your money). A solo open source project depending on volunteers is a lot less likely to have that.


stopped reading at the first sentence.

Stop bringing your personal drama here please.


You do realise that you're the one being personally dramatic here, right? Especially with a comment like that.


It's interesting how some people always assume it's a moral failing when others refuse to engage with their bullshit.


I'm starting to understand why you're personally invested in defending toxic online behaviour.

I replied to your post, responding to the issues you raised in your original post. Engage with it or don't engage with it, that's up to you, but don't fill the forum with nonsense. Absent any actual interaction with the points I raised this will be my last reply in the thread.


GP clearly and convincingly explained how there was nothing personal about their comments. You, OTOH, bring in your mechanic and his wife... And then get fucking hostile in response to a calmly reasoned explanation.

So no, it's definitely you who are bringing the personal drama here. To the extent that one can't help wondering, mr Random-string-of-letters-and-numbers, whether you are that hostile solo developer.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: