[aur-general] Attempting to update upwork-beta, and hit a head-scratcher

[Shane Simmons]

If anyone cares to review the comments, yes, I posted on the git repo, but
only because of the admonishment that AUR isn't the place to post bugs on
aurman.  Or, you could review the comments if they weren't deleted.  Part
of mine were a plea to just leave the thread up for people who were
similarly confused.  Request denied, account locked, and a blanket message
that peoples' accounts were being suspended for spam.

Had you simply posted a simple "make sure to install expac-git before
upgrading or aurman will complain about broken dependencies" would have
avoided having anyone post comments.   Had expac-git actually been broken
instead of me just not understanding that PKGVER doesn't get updated in a
PKGBUILD ;-) relying on a nonexistent package would be a bug, no? ;-)  Your
response to that was to first post the output of pacman -Qi, then to hurl
an insult about how users are turing-complete and I should act like I am.
(I'm paraphrasing here because, quite frankly, I can't refer to the deleted
comments.)  It's not nearly as obvious as you seem to think it is (I
generally avoid anything that has -git dependencies), and a simple google
search shows that you need guidance sometimes, too.  Treat others the way
you want to be treated, imho.

As for the reason I posted to git, well,

"This is not the right place for reporting aurman bugs or request features,
please use https://github.com/polygamma/aurman/issues

If you do not want to register on GitHub for such things, I do not care
from now on.

I am not going to respond to comments on this page, if they have nothing to
do with the PKGBUILD.

tl;dr: Bugs and feature requests -> GitHub, PKGBUILD problems -> here, not
going to answer comments if they have nothing to do with the PKGBUILD from
now on"

Anyway, my solution was pretty simple: just stop using aurman.  If I'm
going to lose access to AUR because my post is deemed Not A Problem, then I
can't trust the software.  I didn't go around to various forums posting
about how people shouldn't use it; it's a popular AUR helper for a very
good reason.  I fully expect my account will be suspended shortly after I
hit Send, and I guess that's fine.  I'm not married to Arch, either, which
I'll have to stop using because I won't just make packages for myself to
keep using Upwork.     But just...settle down.    Not every non-positive
comment is a personal attack on you.

On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 1:46 PM Eli Schwartz via aur-general <
aur-general at archlinux.org> wrote:

> On 07/16/2018 01:47 PM, Shane Simmons via aur-requests wrote:
> > I never received any kind of notification that my account was
> > suspended, or why.  As far as I can recall, my best guess would be
> > that it was because I had stupidly published a bug comment to the
> > aurman AUR page and was harshly schooled by the aurman developer that
> > his package depends on a -git package, which had to be installed
> > manually because, again, stupidly, I didn't know that -git packages'
> > PKGBUILDs don't contain the current version, but is instead
> > calculated during install.
> >
> > If that's why, after I understood the issue I just shrugged and went
> > on with my life, and wasn't aware there was a continuing problem
> > until I tried to push updates.  I'm more than happy to push my
> > changes if I can; if it can't be reinstated, though, then I'd at
> > least like to know why, please.
>
> I did that, because of:
>
> "
> Alad commented on 2018-06-06 12:00
> I've already removed scores of spam from this page. The next guy who
> makes personal attacks or feels entitled to support without using the
> proper channels as kindly requested by the author will get his account
> suspended indefinitely.
> "
>
> And it is rather disingenuous to suggest that you posted *one* comment
> and then moved on with life. One comment, is the number of comments that
> weren't deleted. You've got another five comments there that I or alad
> deleted, which makes four comments (3 deleted) for that *one* issue, and
> another 2 unrelated but also deleted comments.
>
> ...
>
> Now let's consider why you were making all those comments on the AUR
> page to begin with. It's because you already responded to a closed,
> explained issue on the developer's Github repository:
> https://github.com/polygamma/aurman/issues/153#issuecomment-399191472
>
> And you did so in a rude manner, on top of ignoring the resolution (you
> did not exactly ask for understanding, you merely told the developer he
> was wrong).
> He then banned you from his github repo *after explaining yet again*,
> apparently because he dislikes you and doesn't want to listen to you
> etc. yadda yadda yadda.[1]
>
> So... you moved over to the AUR and decided to treat that as a means of
> furthering your campaign of argumentation, after a couple exchanges of
> which I deleted most of the comments and suspended your AUR account too.
> Because if people aren't supposed to flood the AUR comments with
> questions about the upstream development, then that goes triple for
> using the AUR for the explicit purpose of circumventing the upstream
> developer's ban policy for their own support medium.
>
> FWIW your account is no longer suspended. But, keep in mind that again
> there was a pinned comment warning users about the kind of behavior
> likely to result in suspension.
>
> I don't want to see this sort of hounding again. Picking a misguided
> fight with people across two websites does not contribute value to the AUR.
>
> (Next time consider politely asking on e.g. aur-general "they say this
> is supposed to work, but I don't understand how, can some knowledgeable
> person please explain the concept to me".)
>
> --
> Eli Schwartz
> Bug Wrangler and Trusted User
>
>
> [1] -- People are welcome to think whatever they wish about developers
> who practice an over-eager ban policy, as long as they think it
> somewhere other than the AUR. I also encourage people to read the
> discussion at https://github.com/polygamma/aurman/issues/140 before
> passing judgment.
>
>