[arch-general] offtopic ml (WAS eons ago: Re: change in mount behaviour?)

[C Anthony Risinger]

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Heiko Baums <lists at baums-on-web.de> wrote:
> Am Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:14:01 -0600
> schrieb C Anthony Risinger <anthony at xtfx.me>:
>
>> not always, and i use a mobile 70%+ of the time.  i don't want to
>> create a new filter for every long-winded thread to nowhere.  maybe i
>> can create a label -> trash, and flag multiple conversations ... maybe
>> i can't.  why should i?
>
> Because you don't want to see those e-mails.
>
> What do you think to how many mailing lists I am subscribed and in how
> many threads I'm not interested even on arch-general, aur-general etc.
> You know what I do with those threads? What anyone else would do. I
> just ignore them and delete those e-mails, because they may be
> important and interesting to other people, maybe to the devs, but not
> to me.

you're not understanding what i've written, or simply being
argumentative.  i never said -- or even implied -- that only messages
interesting to me should be disallowed.  i said we are all expected to
maintain a high-level of relevancy -- and quality -- to Arch linux
problems, directions, and decisions.

the 3-ish threads that spawned are irrelevant, and blatantly
contradict this expectation.  there are no problems we can fix.  there
are no issues we can address.  there is only "the world is against me
and my crew"-esque rambling.  now, do i believe pro-audio, or pro-*,
or hobbyist-*, can ask questions and offer input? of course i do! i
even find quite a bit interesting.  however one agenda is not weighted
differently than the rest, and all forms of constructive conversation
*must* have *some* kind of attainable or at least
*****discernible***** goal/path, of which the recent PA threads are
100% devoid.

... apply the same logic used in a forum. why am i explaining this?
you don't ask Ubuntu questions in the Newbie forum.

> Do I tell the people to shut up and not discuss their Nvidia problems
> because I have an ATI card and am not affected by Nvidia issues?

we both know this is misrepresentative of what i've stated.

> For me discussions about Nvidia are not necessary, for Nvidia users
> they likely are. For you discussions about PA may be unnecessary, for
> pro-audio users they are important. Or what do you mean, why there came
> so much feedback from so many people incl. pro-audio users and why
> this thread got that long?

i've seen several people attribute that PA works fine with the
proaudio related tools.  i read others validate the use case of PA and
acknowledge it's peaceful coexistence.  i've watched a handful
continuously muddy the water, despite glaring gaps in their linux
knowledge or potential solutions.  many of the "dependency hell"
garbage has nothing to do with PA, or any software, but rather the
inability for any known binary package manager to properly express
near limitless configurations.

tl;dr ... i have no !@#$%^& idea.

> If your mobile is not capable to handle such e-mail filters, just don't
> use your mobile for reading such mailing lists or buy a more capable
> one.

my phone runs android 4, it probably could handle it. alas, this is
about cleaning up the neighborhood, not avoiding certain parks and
streets.

>> ... you know what's way cooler? believing others are capable of
>> respecting each other's time, and the reason others join a list in the
>> first place (ie. the expected boundaries).
>
> Oh, you mean because I should respect your time I should shut up and
> suspend my judgement? You really mean I should let myself censored
> because of your time? What about respecting other people's opinion?

well, yes, in fact i do.  i didn't join to endure prolonged outbursts
stemming from a lack of self-control.  think about why you are here.
think about why hundreds of others are here.  try to play nice, or
vent frustrations on a medium under your control.  i dont think i'm
the minority here ;-) but maybe.

> If such a discussion is unimportant to you and you're not interested in
> it, just ignore it.

and in most cases i do, with relatively high tolerance.  but guys,
seriously ... PA ... !@#$%^& seriously.  find a solution, find a
workaround, accept it, use a new DE, write a new package manager, use
a new distro, compile from scratch or ABS ... ANYTHING CONSTRUCTIVE.
ANYTHING.  oooor just STFU about it, until you think of a new action
item.

please. i beg of you. find an outlet that produces meaningful advances
in your agenda.

> I think such a discussions like this one about PA is important, even if
> it's on an Arch related mailing list. But the problem with PA e.g.
> resp. this ongoing dependency hell is a general one and Arch is part of
> the "general" Linux community. And probably such a discussion
> is read by other more "important" people and then brought to the "right"
> place, etc.

the "right" people are simply those who "do" constructive things. and
that is the crux of why this and similar topics piss people off -- the
loudest voices are not in that group.

> And again, this discussion about PA has evolved from an Arch related
> topic. So should this discussion just be stopped, because it gets
> off-topic somehow and you are not interested in it?

... say what?

mount -> init -> systemd -> Lennart Poettering -> pulseaudio ->
linux-dependency-hell-WTF-this-is-mega-crap?

ehm ... sure ... if you lump natural mating, selective breeding, and
gene-splicingly-genetic-engineering together under one umbrella term,
and call it "evolution".

> I guess you should think about that.

you're absolutely right!  ok-let-me-think-about-that-no.

sorry bud. this is exhausting, and just pollutes further ... it's all
you from here. i'm not an enemy, just a friend who wants to help you
make real progress.

-- 

C Anthony