[News.eclipse.foundation] Re: [NEWCOMER] - Evaluation Summary: What is E

[ilias <ilias@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

[note to readers: nearly everything is usefull, including replies which do  
not respect "original content". This message is a nice example to showcase  
commonly used rejoinder mechanisms]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 01:54:40 -0400, Eric Clayberg  
<clayberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> "ilias" <ilias@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:opsfwpoagrrp2aut@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > eclipse is _not_ a no-cost production environment
>
> Nothing is truly "no-cost".

[isolate statement from rationales, counter with a generalisation]

> > eclipse is not a "write once run everywhere" solution
>
> And neither is Java in general.

[isolate statement from rationales, counter with a generalisation]

> > eclipse is not an overall elegant and efficient design
>
> I couldn't disagree more. I find the design of Eclipse to be quite  
> elegant
> and efficient. I have been using Eclipse and SWT full time now for nearly
> five years, and I used its predecessors from IBM for a nearly a decade
> before that. Eclipse is the crowning achievement of one of the world's
> greatest OO engineering groups (IBM's OTI Labs). It is extremely well
> architected and extremely well engineered, and something that IBM and the
> Eclipse community should be very proud of.

[isolate statement from rationales, counter with some impressive  
historical background ans some  marketing stuff]

> > eclipse foundation is not fast and efficient
> >    - User feedback is not processed immediately
>
> Translation: they aren't doing back flips to respond to your every whim.

[isolate statement from rationales, counter with some funny comments ]

> Mike has been doing a superb job in responding to you and keeping his  
> cool in the face of your continual provocations.

[ changing context: declare criticism as personal, declare criticism as  
personal provocations, protect person in a personal tone]

[ clarification: my criticism targets effectively the EMO and most of all  
the eclipse Board, which is the final responsible for the current  
situation within the eclipse foundation]

> If you want them (or anyone) to pay any attention to you, you need to  
> focus
> your energies on one or two specific issues and work to address them.

[make some suggestions in a slight didactical tone (even if suggesting the  
status-quo)]

> Your (12 gauge) shotgun approach to criticizing everything in sight has

[funny comments ]

> resulted
> in the good ideas that you have (and you do have some good ideas) being  
> lost in the noise.

[give a positive point, to avoid looking to negative]

> > - I've suggested to assist the eclipse foundation practically as an
> > independent, with the goal of a >=5% efficiency increase within 3 months
> >  from now.
> > - No answer.
>
> So...you offered your services to the Eclipse Foundation as a consultant  
> to improve their efficiency by *5%* and you didn't get an answer. Hmmm.  
> Are you honestly surprised by that? You've certainly got some brass  
> ones, I'll grant you that.

[fun, fun, fun]

[btw: I got an answer]

> Here's a suggestion: leave them alone for awhile and you will improve  
> their efficiency by ay least 5% right off the bat.

[and more fun]

> > - I close the eclipse case now quickly, as I cannot deal anymore with  
> > such
> > irrationality and inefficiency (apology! my aggression level has raised
> > due to several unanswered issues, including privacy policy complaints)
>
> Unfortunately, your level of aggression has been quite apparent, and it

[isolate a self stated negative property, move it out of context,
strenghten its appearance and...]

> has all but drowned out any good suggestions that you have offered.

[...connect it as negatively influencing a "positive point given"]

> > - Moving on to NetBeans.org now, picking it, starting to work.
>
> OK, that works for me. I'm sure they will be much more appreciative of  
> your efforts.

[this here is to sad to comment.]

> > The feedback/influence/contribution/information channels look much more
> > efficient @netbeans.org!
>
> In that case, feel free to make liberal use of them.

[again, to sad to comment]

> > As a conclusion, the product should have a much higher quality.
>
> The product should have a much higher quality? While it isn't perfect, it
> already has an exceptional level of quality. Eclipse is now the dominant
> player in the Java IDE market for very good reason.

[switch context (quality statement referes to netBeans, the comment to  
eclipse]

-

Please show at least respect against "original content".

.

--
http://lazaridis.com