[mythtv-users] Leaving...

[Robert McNamara]

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Andrew Close <aclose at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 3:52 PM, George Mogielnicki <george at begos.ca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Maybe I'm off base and mailing lists should be able to scale
>>>> indefinitely,
>>>> but personally I find it hard to follow items of interest among so many
>>>> mailings.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Gmail is nice.  Filter these messages into a folder.  All the replies show
>>> up in a single line.  Scan the subjects and the first line without having
>>> to
>>> open the message and star the ones you want to follow.  Then open the
>>> stared
>>> ones and mark the rest read.
>
> <snip/>
>
> i second GMail ;)
>
>> Wouldn't a forum be useful in directing all this traffic to it's proper
>> place? I'm hanging around this forum http://www.pbxinaflash.com/forum/ and
>> although it is very active, it does not overwhelm, nicely organized, great
>> features.
>>
>> Why this list is not a forum ?
>
> ah, forums.  this has been discussed several times.  if you were using
> GMail and searched your personal Myth Archive...  ;)
>
>
> --
> Andrew Close
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
>

At risk of creating a situation that will prove what I think is Brad's
point, I don't think the errant, useless information is what he was
referring to.  In fact, I don't think he cared about the volume of the
messages *at all*, but rather their often-objectionable content.  I'll
try to summarize in a way that won't result in rage-filled replies,
but if it does, it'll just make my point better than I am likely to be
able to.

Many, many people on this list behave with an entitled, rude attitude.
 It's not entirely everyone's fault, as IMO the list has been left
unmanaged and unmoderated.  I won't speak for any group, so don't
think I'm trying to speak for "the devs" or "the contributors" or any
other person but myself.  I *do* know that I'm a contributor and that
myself and many other contributors on Freenode are constantly aghast
at some of the ignorant, rude things said on the list, to the point
where many of the most knowledgeable people using Myth avoid this list
like the plague.  There are many days where I don't even know why I
continue to read except for the comic value.

When a decision is made about myth, or an opinion or idea floated, the
idea will *always* make someone unhappy.  It's just a fact of life and
of course there will be naysayers.  Sadly, this list has become a
collaborative shouting board.  Where one person has a meltdown about
something they don't like, there are always five more people to shout
their agreement and to loudly, rudely denounce someone/something/etc.
It's not hard to read back into the past and see many many recent
instances where this has been the case.  In fact, you will see people
who would rather see development stagnate (even when it coul lead to a
solution that would make them happier) when one of their pet features
are threatened (Even when that "threat" is only an opinion!).

The usual fallback when this happens is something to the effect of "If
you guys/you/they have that attitude, nobody is going to use your
product!"  What escapes some is that Myth isn't a product.  It's a
hobby, it's a project, it's a blug-- it's many things, but a product
it's not.  "Product" (and the implication that it should be
pushed/evangelized/take over the world) isn't something any of the
devs or collaborators who *I* know of care very much about.  Rather,
when I have added something to Myth, it has been because it has been
something I wanted and because I derived fun from implementing it.  If
it ceased to be fun, I'd stop.  I think that I'm not alone in this
perspective.  I've come to terms with the fact that the way I choose
to do something won't always take into account someone else's usage
patterns/preferences/etc., but here's the crux of the matter:  I wrote
it, it's going to behave my way.  When I spend dozens of hours on
something, and have a finished patch that I'm proud of and works
perfectly for my habits, I'm proud of it.  It's a sad fact of life
that Open Source is not a democracy.  At best, it's a collaborative
dictatorship.  Everyone can take the code and do what they like with
it, and everyone is free to submit improvements.  The buck must stop
with someone, and ultimately a maintainer of a module or piece of
software will decide what gets accepted/rejected/added/removed.

So let's address another common response:  "I can't code, but my
opinion matters/I submit bug reports/etc."  In my mind, there is a
scale of value of opinions.  At the top is a full on developer with
commit access.  They maintain an element of myth and, as mentioned
above, the buck stops with them.  Their opinion when it comes to the
plugin/element is the final say.  Then, you have code contributors.
By getting to the implementation of a feature, they get to decide how
it behaves.  While their decisions are ultimately approved or denied
by the dev, this level gets a fair degree of say and has an opinion
that is generally fairly valuable.  (Note that the quality and breadth
of patch also gives greater credence to that person's opinion-- if you
submit a patch to change a letter or word in a text field, that's
great, and appreciated-- but your opinion will probably take a back
seat to someone submitting new plusing or huge patches-- fact of
life).  Then you have bug reporters.  Good bug reports are hard to
come by.  They are few and far between (check out all the tickets
closed invalid on trac).  So yeah, those people who show a reliable
track record of good bug submissions have valued opinions.

Then you have the people who have opinions as "an average user."  Is
that of value?  Sure it is.  But will it override the wishes of anyone
above them?  Probably not.

So we come to the users list, which is sort of a closed ecosystem of a
lot of the same people.  Big fish, small pond, if you will.  Time and
again, I see people who are *major* contributors and devs shouted down
for their opinions/decisions by people who lie lower on the totem pole
(and whose tangible contributions are trivial or nonexistent).  So ask
yourself-- how many times do you pet the dog that bites you?  For that
kind of thing, many many people who lie in the -dev and contributor
categories have sworn off this list entirely.

To use another metaphor, let's say you take the gender of your choice
out on a first date.  You've got to take it slow, and recognize that
you have to work your way up to things, and that you don't get to make
demands at first.  Buy her dinner.  help he move into her new place.
Contribute.  Collaborate.  More than anything, keep your opinions to
yourself until you're entitled to express them.  This project is the
same.  If there's any sort of disconnect between the active side of
the project and the user side of the project, it's because the
decisions and opinions of the people doing the implementation have
been derided, rudely responded to, shouted down, etc.

So, you might ask, how can I go about getting my opinion heard in the
"right" way?  I would say that the first thing to do is get to know
who the people at the top are.  There's a page of who the "go to" devs
are on the trac wiki.  Rather than saying how something *should* be,
or god help me, putting it to a *vote* (yes, it happens-- often), try
engaging that person in this forum.  Explain that you'd like to be
able to do X.  Does this make sense to them?  Is there anything you
can do to help them?  Ask!  If there's a good reason not to, be
prepared to be open minded and accept that you might not get your way
OR that that person might be too busy/uninterested to implement it.

Let me give an example.  A few months ago, a question asked *here* led
me to implement trailer functionality in trunk.  I started by talking
to the MythVideo maintainer about it, and how he'd like to see it
implemented.  I consulted with him on and off to make sure I was on
trak, and ultimately saw my feature committed.  Note that this new
feature came from an idea posed on this list.  Now, I'm not saying it
was necessarily asked in just the right way, but it can happen.  Guy A
wanted something done, Guy B saw it and was capable of it and
collaborated with Maintainer X to do it right.  Guy A ends up happy.
I didn't steamroll over the maintainer's opinions, I took them into
account and when there was a difference of opinion, I gave the tie to
him.  I didn't just decide to release my work my way, ignoring the
opinions or project style.  Could I have?  Sure!  It's open source!
But I want my work to be a *part* of the project and that means
setting ego/glory/etc. aside sometimes and accepting that getting what
you want will sometimes be a longer road than you would like.  It
could happen a lot more but to get the implementor side engaged in
that process, I think it's going to take a conscious change of
attitude here.  Otherwise, things will go on here as they always have,
with righteous indignation and nothing really getting done.  I don't
like it, I would hope that on some level even the most strident folks
want to see things change.

I am anxious about writing this response.  I fully expect, from prior
experience, a dismantling of each paragraph and being told how I'm
wrong.  I also might get "If you don't like it so much then you should
*leave*."  I mostly ignore those unless there's a point that I feel is
worth making in response.  I expect to hear how the devs need to
change too, etc.  The fact of the matter is-- they don't *have* to.
It's their project and it really *is* easy to tune out the users list.
 The "big fish" here can go on steamrolling about and saying how
things should be-- but there's not a lot of potency there and, in my
opinion, that kind of thing doesn't help anyone.  But maybe there's an
opportunity here to see things improve.

Robert