<!DOCTYPE html>
<html data-lt-installed="true">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body style="padding-bottom: 1px;">
<p>Hi again,</p>
<p>> Harsh criticism exists mostly because giving critic is skill
that lot of<br>
> people lack, and they think measurement of it is how harsh
you can be.</p>
<p>I have to disagree. There is nothing more disgusting than a
sugarcoated criticism. Critics need to be fair, direct, and
precise. And the most importantly, proportional. Bigger mistakes
deserve harsher criticism.</p>
<p>> We as a project should and need to be interested of
well-being of the<br>
> patch authors, as those are the people who put time and
effort on the<br>
> project. That includes you too.</p>
<p>A grown up man should not be offended by criticism. If that
impairs well-being of the author, yes, I believe that is the
problem of that person. This is not a kindergarten.</p>
<p>> Obviously I don't agree, sorry if the scientific or software
field shows<br>
> like that for you</p>
<p>I respect your opinion, but this is how science has always
worked, except for maybe the last decade. If VLC belongs to that
movement, this is most likely not the best place for me to be a
part of.</p>
<p>> So you are implying that as your comments on that merge
request caused<br>
> discussion about code of conduct related things, everyone
else would<br>
> have right to be really harsh toward you, because your
actions caused<br>
> possible conflict against project agreed rules? I'm not sure
you are<br>
> actually agreeing on that?</p>
<p>If you want to fit my comments to the Rule No. 2, you are more
than welcome, but that definitely does not make it obvious that I
breached any rule at all. At least, I would like to see others'
opinions on that.<br>
</p>
<p>On the other hand, the subject author seems to _clearly_ breached
the rules. Even if I happen to breach the rules, that still does
not justify subsequent toxic behavior.<br>
</p>
<p>And if I create garbage merge requests, then yes, I would like
people to be harsh towards me so that I naturally be more careful
the next time.<br>
</p>
<p>> Yes, You have put lot of effort to the qt interface and
improved it a lot.</p>
<p>Improvements won't last so long if we start to think "5
regressions with 10 lines of change" is part of normal development
cycle. Maybe this is just me, but I hope not. Everybody makes
mistakes, but then you are supposed to apologize and take the
criticism.</p>
<p>> Not all the time needs to be about self improvement by other
people<br>
> merits. Same as you can agree that most likely you would not
most likely<br>
> agree on improvements beneficial to you, what I would think
could be.<br>
> Without either of us needing to be right on the matter.</p>
<p>This is science, there are facts, being right on a matter is not
relevant as it is not subjective. What happens if someone claims
that gravity does not exist? Who takes flat-earthers seriously?
Some code is non-arguably better or worse than some other code
doing the same thing (not talking about the obvious trade-off
situations). If you consistently push garbage code, you are
supposed to self-improve. At least this is what I have been
following myself.<br>
</p>
<p>The approach on how to handle things is debatable, but how a
decided thing is implemented can either be done well or poorly.
And we obviously can not allow poor code to creep in to the
codebase, as it tends to be a bigger problem when they accumulate
and then it becomes a "collective" responsibility.</p>
<p>Sincerely,<br>
Fatih<br>
</p>
</body>
<lt-container></lt-container>
</html>