FYI: Grass not so green on the other side

[DaveP]

@Gary

Look I even said that I dont consider myself
a reporter, or a journalist so tactics that work on
Mike Bouma do not work on me.

You do know what the title of this is paraphrased
from dont you?

"Grass is greener on the other side"

Nowhere do I say it is less green on the other side.

I think you are just trying to discredit me. Which is
your right but this:

 Of course you can disingenuously argue with me

Suggests that if I argue with you I am being disingenuous. Which is a childish stance for you to take. Ive seen better debating tactics from 14 year
olds in a playground. Sure they might stumble over
the length of the words you use but the import
is the same.

The fact that you go to the length of choosing to
misnterpret the TITLE ( because as I pointed out there is nothing in the body or my words that could allow you to ascribe motives to me like this )  shows
your desperation to discredit.

In fact your are placing your own meaning and motive on your interpretation of the title
"editorialising" it for your own purpose.

But hey, Ive long gone past expecting anything different from you  having seen how you reacted
on this and one other thread. :-D

I wonder if you would post a story on here about
a row in the Amiga* "communities" with the motives
you are trying to credit to me? I wonder if in fact
the motives you ascribe to me are actually what your
motives would be in my situation?

Nah. You are just lashing out because you are feeling
frustrated and Im a convenient target.  :-)

[DaveP]

@JoannaK

It could be a lot worse. I reckon 20 to 1 odds against
AmigaOS4 appearing at Cebit. ;-)

[bbrv]

It seems you guys are missing the point...

But first:

@Mike, you know having an intelligent conversation beginning with you are an idiot might be difficult for most to overcome.  I tried.  I not sure that sank in either. Now that I have made the connection between Glaucus and our earlier exchange here I can consider the source more thoughtfully.

@Herewegoagain, you suggested private email and when you receive it you rejected it.  What is the sense of this?  BTW, what do you know about being a CEO?  Have you ever started a Company?  Have you ever managed people?  I am not *aggressing* you, I just want to know what your qualifications are to judge me?  In the meanwhile, if you become a customer, we can have another discussion.

@machinehead, forget the CEO part, maybe we will find someone more able to do that.  How about Raquel and I are busy on these boards because we have over 1 million Euros invested in the Pegasos, MorphOS, and organization we are building to support it.  Do you think we should be allowed to comment?

Have you read this post? :-)

This site is very good.  In fact, with all due respect to ANN and MorphOS-News this site is better.  But, the others can improve and so can amiga.org.  BTW, Amiga-News is a good site too, but evolution is a great thing and they all need to evolve a little in our opinion.  Let us give you some of our ideas...

We will be looking for a few *good* trolls soon.  We will need to populate the sites with active, intelligent, and sharp exchange.  Have you ever seen a 80+ thread on MorphOS-News? Controversy attracts attention -- both indignation and pride of association.  When the whole episode flip-flops at the end, the bashers are left without quarter and sulk away, the *good* guys cheer, and the silent majority moves to the high ground (hopefully where we are standing at the top when it is over).  Trolling can be useful, but personal insults and falsifications should not be tolerated.  Or, set up a special arena where anyone -even CEOs- can say whatever they want without reproach.  Keep all the BS there -- the Flame Pit or something like that -- actually condoning that might not be good either (just sharing ideas and trying to stimulate discussion).  Maybe, one way would be an online duel or the two adversaries go against each other in an online game of quake.  Someone wins, another loses, but the venting had an alternative emotional release than personal insult (where most people resort to when they cannot find anything else to say).  

Lies should be exposed directly at the end of the thread, a commentary should be made and the comments locked.  Another thread can begin (as Wayne has done) and the synopsis can be referenced (like lawyers do with Case Law).  Why waste all that brain power?!  Even if some of the comments were misguided they were part of what created the discussion.  The idea is to not allow ignorance to be bliss.  Example: This thread was initiated by Glaucus who made an outrageous statement about Universal amiga.org Conscription.  143 comments were made from 87 members.  There were five new members that posted for the first time in the thread.  The Troll Ratio was .687 (the Troll ratio is calculated by adding up the total number of posts made by each member in all threads; if they post more than once in a thread they are counted more than once; the total number at the end is divided by the total number of individual posts in the thread.  This number is divided by 1000 and a unit of time.  1000 being some magic number poster number....here is your gold star, etc.).  Anyway, the synopsis would continue....there were excellent remarks from MarkTime, DaveP and gary_c.  Here are the key points: 1, 2, 3.  In conclusion, XXX.  This thread has achieved Gold Status and will be recorded as Thread 276, stardate XXX (hey, after the stormtrooper thing MarkTime I have to have some sort of related remark...)  Seriously, good comments or conclusions should be filed into the library, referenced and available for all to consider.

People are not loyal unless they feel like they are part of something.  Wayne has been very shrewd in creating hooks that draw people back and keep them active.  We would like to see something more along those lines -- something beyond commentary and screenshots.  While both can be very good indications of skill, we would like to be extolling the advent of the website that hosts the development of a DEMO project or a set of leagues for internet game competitions (and if you become a gladiator in that league you get a broadsword icon like Dammy uses (for example) underneath your name.  Picture a South American General's chest...mass multiplayer online games ARE the future.  If we could organize this in games, leagues, teams, we might see some interesting cohesion and a powerful sense of belonging.  Teamwork!

Actually, we need a system to reward loyalty, responsibility, creativity, intelligence and skill.  We are not looking for minions.  We need innovators, creative types, interesting characters, etc (all wrapped up in that team thing).  Wayne does a pretty good job because he is smart, but he needs to have more tools than a six gun -- he needs to be more than a Sheriff.  We can create an environment like this, but it will take smart people to do it...;-)

Raquel and I do not have anything against you three mentioned earlier, there is just more going on here than meets the eye -- think about it. ;-)

Community suggests participation and opportunity, but it also requires responsibility. We are NOT looking to standardize the patter.  You need to understand that.

Here is a message we would like to send:

Dear DaveP (a good example),

We have read with no small amount of interest the comments you have made online in the last year.  We would like you to know that from our perspective you are on of the top 5% of the posters online in the threads we read.  Could we draw your interest to a new organization we are establishing?  We would like to ask you to become a charter member.  Here is what you have to do:

1. Continue to do your own thinking
2. Continue to post thoughtful comments and insight into remarks made online
3. Agree to this code of conduct (example): XXX
4. Help us keep the ship moving in a good direction

Etc....

It is different than a Moderator (in fact -Moderator- sounds like Sister Mary Elephant -- we should come up with some new names).  It is more like a First Citizen.  Think of ancient Greece.  First Citizens can be dubbed Senators when they have contributed huge amounts of effort and intelligence...see where we are going with this...;-)

Anyway, thanks reading this!

Sincerely,

R&B :-D

[DaveP]

Dear DaveP (a good example),

 Could we draw your interest to a new organization we are establishing? We would like to ask you to become a charter member. Here is what you have to do:

1. Continue to do your own thinking
2. Continue to post thoughtful comments and insight into remarks made online
3. Agree to this code of conduct (example): XXX
4. Help us keep the ship moving in a good direction

Where does one go to find out more? I don't want to appear ungrateful
for what seems to be quite a compliment but momma told me never
sign nothin' till I'd seen it with the ink dry under a magnifying glass. ;-)

Why waste all that brain power?! Even if some of the comments were misguided they were part of what created the discussion. The idea is to not allow ignorance to be bliss.

Now this I agree would be neat, but it would be difficult
to implement and you would need a searchable index on
the summaries.

[Herewegoagain]

@Herewegoagain, you suggested private email and when you receive it you rejected it. What is the sense of this? BTW, what do you know about being a CEO? Have you ever started a Company? Have you ever managed people? I am not *aggressing* you, I just want to know what your qualifications are to judge me? In the meanwhile, if you become a customer, we can have another discussion.

I never suggested a private email with ME.... I meant to your customer who was complaining with concerns over his "purchase".  So when you pm'd me and said what do you want to talk about, my answer is NOTHING.... I'm not the customer who is disgruntled.

As for the CEO thing, I've never been a Priest either, but I know for sure what conduct to expect of him.  No particular qualifications needed, other than common sense.  It's simple Bill.  

And for the record, I've never called you an idiot, jerk, coward, or any other bad thing.  If you want to gain respect, you have to show it first.

[bbrv]

herewegoagain Herewegoagain...

Again, you are certainly entitled to your opinion about me and anything else, but just to make sure you don't miss the real issues here:

1.  Eliminate false statements from the list of facts (Miky060 is not a customer).

2.  Demonstrate respect to others: I would like to apologize to you if I misunderstood your personal comments about me.

Starting discussion again....

Actually, you have given us another idea..."common sense" is undoubtedly the English language's greatest misnomer.  Further, your use of CEO and Priest in the same sentence calls a thought toward "perspective." Why do you think the way you do? Where do you come from?  What is your technical background?  (etc. , etc.)  Sort of like your "Account Page" -- WHO YOU ARE.   When understood, it is easier to evaluate an opinion or a statement another makes to be able to better appreciate the ideas/opinions/statements.

This is heavy-duty stuff, but think of it as "credentialing."  THIS IS WHO I AM.  The more you reveal about yourself the better others understand you.  This is the delicate balance between "Privacy" and "Security."  Security should a standard and it should be the highest possible.  Privacy is a choice each person makes.  It is two different things.

Come back to the Community idea...say we have three levels of participation:

1. Blind Pool
2. Chitchat
3. Serious stuff

Anyone can say whatever they want in the Blind Pool -- even Anonymously (yikes, I cannot believe I said that).  Chitchat is what we have here now.  Serious stuff is on a higher level.  Comments must respect the dignity of others, rely on verifiable fact, and be written with an ambition of making a concept or an issue more understood by all concerned.  To post here full disclosure is required.  You can still "troll" you just have to back it up and have the courage to put a "face" to the comments.

Who you are = your credentials.  This is with the authority you speak.  

We actually could do that with a smart card.

Idonotwanttodoitagain, OK?   :-D

We can keep the discussion at this level.  It is better for us.  Please post your ideas.

Sincerely,
R&B :-)

[gary_c]

DaveP wrote:

Look I even said that I dont consider myself
a reporter, or a journalist so tactics that work on
Mike Bouma do not work on me.

I'm not using any "tactics" as far as I know; I'm just trying to be logical.

Nowhere do I say it is less green on the other side.

You say "FYI: Grass not so green on the other side". Doesn't "less green" mean the same as "not so green"? :-)

I think you are just trying to discredit me.

Not at all. I don't have any bad feelings about you as a person. All I'm doing is responding to arguments, to statements. What bothers me in these forums is when I read something that as an idea seems off base, or when I read something that doesn't seem to be logical or when I feel some kind of game is being played. It doesn't matter to me who the poster is. In fact I'd like to think we could all have a good time together if we meet up somewhere. It's the ideas and statements I take issue with here.

The fact that you go to the length of choosing to
misnterpret the TITLE ( because as I pointed out there is nothing in the body or my words that could allow you to ascribe motives to me like this ) shows
your desperation to discredit.

First of all, the title is a pretty important part of a post, wouldn't you say, especially when you are starting a new thread and so it's the title of the thread. So when your title says essentially that things aren't so great presumeably in Genesi land (an assumption made based on the subject of the morphos-news.de and ann.lu threads), we have to take that as your position on the matter. Secondly, you quote ADMV's post, agreeing with it, in which he criticizes Genesi's handling of the matter. So, no, the interpretation of your post title stands as valid, as far as I can tell.

In fact your are placing your own meaning and motive on your interpretation of the title
"editorialising" it for your own purpose.

I don't know why you're going to such lengths to distance yourself from the obvious interpretation of the title of your post. You can edit your old posts, you know, if you're uncomfortable now with what you wrote. But if I'm misinterpreting "The grass is not so green on the other side," then how do you explain  your agreement with ADMV and so on? Anyway, what would my "purposes" be? Although I'm part of the Phoenix consortium, which is working with Genesi,  I'm not a blind advocate of anybody's cause here. I support technology that I like and I work with people that I like, but not to the point of being illogical or unreasonable.

But hey, Ive long gone past expecting anything different from you having seen how you reacted
on this and one other thread.

Heh. Comments like that are just funny and only show somebody scraping the barrel bottom for retorts. "long past expecting anything different" -- as if you knew me at all. Please, line up my "reactions" for scrutiny if I'm so far gone. ;-) I'd like to see what you consider out of order.

I wonder if you would post a story on here about
a row in the Amiga* "communities" with the motives
you are trying to credit to me?

First of all, I wouldn't see the merit in posting about a row when the whole thing should've been taken care of privately. 90% of the posters are using second- or third-hand information and the other 10% are tired and frustrated. So common sense would say it's better ignored. Like I said in my first post in this thread, the "row" at ann.lu was the result of some guy doing an "FYI" about the morphos-news thread. I saw no need to perpetuate the ridiculousness. Anyway, if you are in fact neutral on this FYI thing, I imagine we'll be seeing posts from you in the future that also show Genesi in a good light, such as about the Equinoxe sponsorship. I'll be keeping my eyes open.

Nah. You are just lashing out because you are feeling
frustrated and Im a convenient target.

No, as I described, you, as a person, are not a target at all. Your post was, and your characterization of it as neutral news was. If I'm "lashing out" then I've set a new standard for low-key lashing.  I'm just commenting on your post and what I interpreted as your motives, based on what I read. Am I frustrated? Sure, we all have frustrations, but I'm not so thick as to redirect my frustrations into a computing forum. Try another explanation if you like, or let the thing drop. This has become the kind of one-on-one you-said/I-said that's got to be the most tedious, no-win thing to read or be part of in a discussion.

-- gary_c

[DaveP]

Look we wont agree until doomsday.

The fact that you cant see that

"Grass Not So Green on the other side"
...is relative to...
"Grass Is Greener on the other side"
...and means....
"Grass on other side is not as green as we thought"
...and not...
"Grass on other side is less green as on this side"
....sayes it all.

Ive supplied you with sufficient collateral on this. If you
want a bitch fight, find someone smaller than you bud.

[bbrv]

Hey!

We think alot of both of you.

Could we bring the focus back to the topic as an example...;-)

R&B :-D

[MikeB]

@ bbrv

We will be looking for a few *good* trolls soon.

IMO if anything is hurting the Amiga community, it is all the trolling and FUD/Misinformation spreading with regard to rival solutions by supporters.

I am in almost daily contact with poeple from outside the Amiga community, communicating about the Amiga market. One of the most important worries seems to be that the Amiga/MorphOS communities present itselves as trollnests to the outside world. You may think that the mass trolling will be in your short term advantage, but according to my personal experience this is not in the best interest of the whole Amiga community and market.

Controversy attracts attention

I believe it's better to have little positive attention, than to have massive negative attention. As you probably know already, controversy and misleading statements can just as well backfire.

[gary_c]

As an example

"Grass Not So Green on the other side"
...is relative to...
"Grass Is Greener on the other side

"is relative to"? Sorry to be pedantic, but this is the kind of incorrect wording that I've been referring to, the reason for  misunderstanding. (And I've been an editor for close to 15 years so I know what I'm talking about.)

If you
want a bitch fight, find someone smaller than you bud.

This is just too sad and ironic to respond to.

-- gary_c

[DaveP]

"Grass Not So Green on the other side"
...is relative to...
"Grass Is Greener on the other side

Sorry to be pedantic, but this is the kind of incorrect wording that I've been referring to, the reason for  misunderstanding. (And I've been an editor for close to 15 years so I know what I'm talking about.)

That's one weird pair of glasses you look out at the world through.

I don't think you do know what you are talking about. Lets see, you mounted an attack on me
and then when i respond you not only accuse me of being
disingenuous but say that any further defense that I might
make is disingenuous. After a bit more back and forth
you accuse me of distancing myself from the title of the topic
but not explain how you come to that conclusion. Then you
try to make out that *I* am prolonging it.  Marks out of ten
for trying to shift ground  - 9.



The greeness of the grass in the title should be seen as being
relative to the saying. You claim that I meant that
the grass was LESS GREEN on the MOS/PEG side than
the AOS/A1 side.

I have just pointed out to you, with teeth gritted it has to be
said that the measurement of GREEN-NESS is RELATIVE
to the SAYING ( that is is GREENER ).

Heres the logic for you:
   A is said to be greater than B ( Grass is greener on the other side )
   A>B
   Someone sayes that A is not so green as it was ( Grass not so green on the other side )
   A--
   Does not break the logic statement:
   A>B
   
What you want me to have said, for your point of view to
be valid, justified or even logically correct would be:

Grass not green on the other side
OR
Grass on other side not so green as this one
   
The measurement of greenness is, as I said before, measured
RELATIVE to the fact that it was seen as greener (A>B) NOT relative
to the other side ( B => A   
You may or may not be an editor, you could claim whatever
your like but firstly this is not an article for a national newspaper
and secondly you could be the editor of your local parish
mag and thirdly you could basically be a pretty crap editor. It has
no bearing on the subject at hand.  

If you
want a bitch fight, find someone smaller than you bud.

This is just too sad and ironic to respond to.

There is nothing ironic or sad about it.

You tried to pick a fight
with me over nothing, you have tried to continue that
against the odds, you haven't gained an inch. You are clearly
( despite your own claims ) a frustrated man and there
are easier ( and more valid ) targets out there that you could
be spending your time with.

It has now come down, according to you, to a misunderstanding. This
means that either I miscommunicated ( I don't think so ) or you
misunderstood what was being communicated ( I don't think you
do now, I think you misunderstood before and fired off a salvo
when you shouldn't and are now backpeddling ).

What do you want me to do next? Go through your posts
in this thread and show exactly how I come to that
conclusion? Or maybe you want to start reading what
you put before to try and regain some level of consistency?

Where have we come to now? I think you are a
drowning man at the far end of a flame war. I'm sure
you have an equally negative opinion of me ( in fact
your obnoxious first post puts me in no doubt ).

I no longer understand what point you are trying to
prove, and Im not sure that you do either.

Now before this degenerates further how about we do everyone
a favour and take it to email?

[MikeB]

@ DaveP

IMO there was nothing wrong with the title you gave to this thread. It is simply your (IMO completely non-offensive) opinion and this is an open forum afterall.

Look I even said that I dont consider myself
a reporter, or a journalist so tactics that work on
Mike Bouma do not work on me.

Any such tactic doesn't influence my way of reporting or opinion statements. My news reporting on OSNews is pretty objective according to most. Of course, I will continue to state my opinions on forums and within feature articles. IMO every good writer does this, but only combined with arguments for why one has such opinions.

The OSNews team is pretty clear with regard to this. For example you could read  David Adams' (site owner) latest review, in which he tried to underline this.

A snip from his article: "Let me preface this review by dispensing with the ridiculous notion of an "objective" review. There is no such thing. A review is an exercise in subjectivity, otherwise it would just be a recitation of specifications."

So asking people to contact OSNews staff behind my back in order to state wild accusations or point to any bias I may have, like Bill Buck has done so recently in the past, will not change anything on OSNews.

[DaveP]

@MikeB
Thanks.

[gary_c]

You may or may not be an editor, you could claim whatever
your like

If I said I'm an editor, I'm an editor. If we can't trust each other about mundane things like that, what's the point of any of this conversation?

but firstly this is not an article for a national newspaper
and secondly you could be the editor of your local parish
mag and thirdly you could basically be a pretty crap editor. It has
no bearing on the subject at hand.

I brought up what I do because in our office we deal with clarity of expression all day every day, and if things had been stated less ambiguously in the beginning, things wouldn't have gone the way they did. My work isn't with a local parish mag or newspaper. Our clients include literally the biggest financial and industrial companies on the planet, as well as government agencies -- just to dispel the idea that we might be involved in neighborhood stuff. I suppose the fact that we're still in business (you've probably heard that Japan's economy hasn't been doing too well for the last decade or two) and that I'm still wanted there might say something about the quality of the work we/I do.

As for this thread, I stand by my original point. I don't think Genesi is squeeky clean; I don't mind pointing out or agreeing where there are problems. So I'm not desperate to try to help maintain that kind of image. But I did believe I saw something under the surface of your FYI. If I was wrong, I apologize. This really isn't worth the aggravation. Your personal attacks on me were counterproductive to any meaningful discussion, but I shoudn't have let those get under my skin. As I said early on, I don't have anything personal against you; I just thought your post was questionable. I won't post in this thread again. I'll do my best to stick to talking on the merits of arguments alone -- which I like to think I do anyway -- and hope others will do the same. Again, I'm sorry for any bad feeling I've caused.

-- gary_c

[DaveP]

@Gary

Do you know what. I just don't care. I don't see this
as an interesting or useful thing to debate. My eyes
have started to glaze over with total boredom
every time I think about how exactly I can explain
it in a way that you will understand or even really
listen to.

Maybe you get some kick out of bitch fights like these, I don't and Im sure the onlookers are just as bored as me, if not more.

No doubt when I post something in the future that
you take exception to there you'll be popping in with
some barely concealed abusive flamebait but my resolution will be ... hey the guy is just trying to bait
you like he did last time. If you ignore him, he'll go back to guarding the bridge.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have a cigar to smoke and
some interesting TECHNICAL subjects to go post about.