> Maybe he's a great team player (...) and doesn't want people to touch what he builds for himself
Isn't that the exact opposite of being a great team player?
I had a boss who was "a great team player" once. We were both working for a rapidly growing startup and he was very open to suggestions on how to improve the system. So naturally when he started his own project I was very much eager to work with him again.
Turns out that it's easy to be a great team player when you are spending someone else's money and changing someone else's code. When I proposed changes to the system he built himself he took it very personal and all of a sudden he was not so open anymore.
It's easy to be generous with other people's money.
> Isn't that the exact opposite of being a great team player?
You're projecting as well which is visible by the example you give which has next-to-nothing in common with what's being discussed here.
You don't have to want to share governing of your personal idea project. You can be open to contributions that align with your goals BUT reject those that don't.
Both can be true at the same time and the latter does not make you a bad team player. It makes you a "if you want to help me build my shed in my back yard I'll welcome you but if you turn out to want to build a garage then I'll show you the door" person. Or in other words, it makes a fairly normal Homo Sapiens.
> Isn't that the exact opposite of being a great team player?
No.
The anecdote you shared shows a different part of being human: Knowing thyself. He let you in before he was mentally and emotionally ready to let go of his code, and as someone else noted in this thread, it has nothing to do what we talk about here.
Again, it's not about "people's money". It's about being ready to share and let go of control.
Is that money worth the credibility they lost? The blue check used to be a status symbol, now accounts are putting out statements making it clear that they never paid for it.
Status symbol? The blue check used to verify that the notable person behind the account is who they claim to be. Now it lacks any meaning other than "I paid $8 for Twitter".
The old blue checks are grieving that they no longer have special treatment and their voices are no longer elevated. They are now just like the common plebs. It's an adjustment process.
After pushing to a branch, gitlab sends you back a URL where you can create the merge request (MR). This broke my flow because I do all my development using command line tools.
So I created this tool that opens an MR off the branch I'm on. It opens up my favorite editor and asks me for a title and a description in the same way that git does for commits. It splits it in first line for title and the rest for the body.
It's very simple but I'm very happy with it. Now I extended it to list the open MRs, show the tickets in the current sprint, etc...
Nobody else in my company uses it tbh, but I don't care because it solves _my_ problem and I love it.
Please, don't use that language. You are talking about a dev who dedicated many hours to building a service for you to call them that only because they have a faulty redirect they haven't noticed. Give the feedback without assuming bad intentions, most likely the developer did not intent to "hijack" the back button, it's just a bug (when developing I don't follow links to my own website from a 3rd party page like HN and then navigate away from it, if you have a redirect on "/" to, for example "/home" it's very easy to miss)
Oh gawd, so much hate for asking someone to not insult another human being. Don't you think it's at least a little bit ironic that now you regulate what I can say to someone?
Given the comments I'm used to seeing in general in HN, the over excited tone of the comments in this post makes me wonder how truthful all the praising is, or if they are related to the company in any way. Maybe HN is actually full of people who build internal tools and find this honestly awesome and a game changer.
I am a coward so I didn't want to be the first one to say it, but so many of these comments are so suspicious. The really positive ones seem to have like 1-2 karma.
Eh I don't see too many like that and even if some customers do show up to give meaningful testimony I think that's fine and useful. The few that are meaningless got voted down and will be dead soon.
To be fair, you are right, now, because when I first opened the discussion there was only 1 critic comment and the rest was overly enthusiastic praise. It really stood out from the usual tone of the discussions.
Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, bots, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.
Isn't that the exact opposite of being a great team player?
I had a boss who was "a great team player" once. We were both working for a rapidly growing startup and he was very open to suggestions on how to improve the system. So naturally when he started his own project I was very much eager to work with him again.
Turns out that it's easy to be a great team player when you are spending someone else's money and changing someone else's code. When I proposed changes to the system he built himself he took it very personal and all of a sudden he was not so open anymore.
It's easy to be generous with other people's money.