[mythtv-users] "broken" as a synonym for "not as I expected." WAS: Re: mythvideo sort order

[blind_Pete]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Anthony Giggins wrote:
> On 29 June 2011 00:10, Jay Ashworth <jra at baylink.com> wrote:
> 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Daniel Kristjansson" <danielk at cuymedia.net>
> >
> > > On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 16:06 +1000, Julius Roberts wrote:
> > > > My point in raising this is that it is all well and good to have
> > > > developed complicated software for some fantastic task, but if it
> > > > doesn't work the way people might usually expect it to, then that in
> > > > my mind is it's not reasonable to blame the user for their poor
> > > > perception of the issue. There's complicated, and then there's just
> > > > plain poorly executed.
> > >
> > > All tools fail to work the way someone expects them too. When a
> > > developer replies to a complaint with "it's working as designed"
> > > that doesn't necessarily imply that the design is correct, but
> > > it puts the onus on the complainant to convince others that the
> > > way they think it should work is superior*. And if they are not
> > > developers or paying someone who is, then they additionally need
> > > to convince someone else to make it happen.

Is that confused someone the target audience?  When I am doing 
something for my own amusement I don't care what other people think.  
When I am trying to impress someone and they are confused a rethink 
is in order.  

I know that 2 AND 2 is 2 or sometime NOT 0, but lots of people think 
that I mean 2 PLUS 2.  Sometimes it is valid to say, "It does what 
I want, therefore it is perfect".  

> > That "all tools fail to work the way *someone* expects them to" -- IE:
> > that there can always be found someone who will be stonkered by the
> > present design -- is true, but not really a counter-argument to any
> > *specific* accusation that a design point violates the Principle of Least
> > Astonishment.
> >
> > Not, Daniel, as you note, that that carries any water in the FOSS
> > community -- which has always been, IME, one of the weaknesses of the
> > FOSS community.  Having done both programming and analysis/design for
> > many years, I can testify that some of the best coders on the planet
> > cannot design their way out of a paper bag.  And there are some good
> > designers who can't code very well, too.
> >
> > Architecture and contracting are two separate disciplines when people
> > are getting paid to do them, but, you see, design is widely viewed as
> > "the fun part", so precisely the people that I think FOSS projects need:
> > designers, who may not be good coders -- are the people who get left by
> > the side of the road; FOSS is not a "meritocracy"... it's a "code-ocracy".
> > If you can't write it yourself, you'd better be a *damned* good
> > salesperson.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > -- jra

"Principle of Least Astonishment" is a good expression.  

I am tempted to practice my sales skills, but that is yet another 
skill that I am not very good at.  

> I expect my shovel to dig its self, therefore it doesn't work the way 
> I expect :(
> 
> Anthony

That would be an unreasonable confusion, as distinct from a reasonable 
confusion.  Or did you mean a power shovel (bulldozer)?  You would have 
to be an idiot to break your back when there are machines that do all 
of the hard work for you.  

If you are not smart enough to use a simple shovel, I want you to stay 
away from computers and voting booths.  

Which analogy applies here?  

blind Pete