I am aware that you do not see where my question is and that is the problem. I have made it clear a number of times. You need to start taking seriously that you don't see what is there not that you don't see it because it isn't there. So here we go again: The question is who is right in this Linux thingi. Who is right? Me, I don't know and the reason I don't know is because the answer to my mind turns on a second question I have no answer to, 'can code be objectively evaluated as superior in say example A as opposed to some alternative example B?'. Because I can't answer the second question I don't think I can answer the first. Does this make sense to you now?
I understand this. What I said was that the link had nothing to do with evaluating code objectively. That is all that I wanted to say. By saying it I simultaneously knew millions of other things, some about which we surely agree. For this reason I find your post OK but off the subject and even potentially distracting. In saying this to you I also feel you will now need to reply creating a second line of whatever it is here you seem to be so good at, 'quibbling' seems to work rather well.
No, I don't know if there is such a thing as judging good code. This would absolutely imply that if somebody said they can judge good code I would not personally know if they could or not. What I am questioning is if within the coding community at Linux and elsewhere there is some general agreement that code is open to objective evaluation. Does the code community feel that whatever judgments it makes as to its ability to objectively judge the technical excellence of one code over another, is done with real objectivity or is it tainted by discrimination?
That is my point now and was in the original post. What I added in the original post was what I am left with being unable to objectively answer, which are the issues that my life experience tells me are likely involved. Those were opinions.
Golly Gee, we seem to have opened a second front. Can't see why I didn't see that coming. (In case anybody is asleep, I just did.)
Highly likely at least. But that is not the issue. The issue is that I don't have the experience to judge how good or bad their judgement might be. There is, after all, two sides of opinion on this neither of which I am qualified to judge based on any skills of my own in evaluating coding. I told you to take seriously the notion that you can't grasp what it means not to know things because your knee jerk reaction is to know everything. When I say I don't know you immediately think I think X or Y or should if I had any sense. I think I have very good sense and that when I say I can't evaluate code it is a fact. Knowing nothing about whether code can be objectively evaluated I can also not know between those who say they do and those who say false are right or wrong. So what you call making the logical presumption gets me absolutely nowhere. But it does for you because you frame the issue as if you know things, like, because some people say they can evaluate code means they actually can.
I'm not a lawyer.
I am quite convinced personally, that I understand the issue as well or better than you do. I also feel that any solution I would come up with would also be as good or better than yours, but I have stuck to the facts and those are that without knowing intimately the issues surrounding the evaluation of code, my opinions aren't worth the power to blow them to hell. You are here to push your ideas and I am hear to tell you the ideas you push are based on your assumptions that you believe to be correct, an act of hubris I resist, but am fully capable of expressing if I chose to as I just did.
Yes.
My personal opinion is that having totally suspected what you say here to be true, that what is good or bad in code is a matter of subjective opinion based on what angle you approach your critique from, what personal preferences, past practices, and styles you have traditionally favored. The real issue here is that somebody who is a dick has begun to consider the the possibility that things might be better if he weren't. Thanks for your post. Bottom line here, my opinion that assholes in motion want to stay in motion, we are witnessing delta in inertia due to social friction. Can you even step into the same river once.
But that is not what concerns me. You did give your opinion on what you think is happening and that is the very opinion I said I had insufficient data to make. After saying so I then added my gut reaction with the understanding I had nothing with which to back it up but that it felt right to me. You also offered answers to how the issue could be addressed, the anonymous contributor thingi. My comment on that was that I did not know enough to be able to agree that would help.
Facebook
Twitter