Responding to Wllbragg

[IAHM-COL]

Thank you, that is the Israel I know!

I have a response but need to stew on this for a bit.
If your willing, I would like to reply, in time, and let you post the followup?

If anyone would read your response without "writing between the lines" or chalking it up to subterfuge, then maybe they might see the heart behind the hammer. I am afraid though that all the historical "gutter talk" has closed any doors and tightened the blinders fastly. It became too personal to too many people (both sides).

I don't ever want to go there.

I doubt any of this will make any difference but I am invested now and feel I have to make my bed.

I hope you will continue to try and take the highest ground even if others don't. I can only tell you that I think the perceptions, on both sides, continue to be askew of the realities.

I can decide for myself where reality is, and as always, I think it is somewhere in the middle.

As far as my doubt's of your motivations, I truly appreciate you taking the time to reply and nudging me back to the middle.

Always your friend,

Wlbragg

[KL-666]

Well Jwocky, the difference between me and a little brat is that i do not care what anyone thinks of me. They may look down on mere users like me, they may brutalize me by calling me insane (as Bomber nicely pointed out Hooray did). But i am not going to spend a second on refuting such silly accusations. Actually i do not even spend a second on thinking about what they think. All i can do is to smile about such pitiful little brats.

Opposite, the little brats cling on every little word they can misinterpret, and keep hanging on in the hope to be able to prove that the other started. Take the word 'slaughter'. The little brats are so happy with it, while being too stupid to understand that it can have different meanings in different contexts. It does not come to their tiny brains that it can mean: If you go on like that, that would objectively mean your end. Nothing to do with the opinion of the messenger.

I am willing to take the risk to trust within safety margins. If the trust is damaged, i simply retreat it. But i fear that with those little brats Thorsten and Bugman it is not likely to work out. I strongly advise the other end to retreat those brats from anything they may consider 'negotiating'. The brats are only interested in throwing oil on the fire and wipe their backs clean.

Kind regards, Vincent

[jwocky]

The point, I try to make clear is, how far the delusions over there go already. There is a risk, especially now that Curt failed to make money via crowd funding (for now), that scorched earth fantasies á la Hooray win more ground. The thinking patterns of delusional patients of this kind are known and there is a group dynamics at work, we know, alas from history, even historical comparisons, while correct, are unpopular. But the same mechanism seems to be at work here and we know how that ended.

[bomber]

I love the fact that they throw out all of Lydiots comments as he's not a content creator....

Now does anyone know a content creator that might have an opinion ...... Oh that'd be me.... but I'm just disrespectful.

[jwocky]

Could be me ... oh wait, I am banned

[KL-666]

This is too funny to skip, sorry wlbragg.

Also I had not read any of the replies by other members yet, those are the ones that get really negative. In fact, I think it is that type of communication, if that is what you want to call it, that is the main cause of the division in our happy group

https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=85&t=29559&p=285478&sid=8e8d767aede9486d99269e2d85948467#p285478

"our happy group"? On what planet do you live? Disney World?

Anyway, i dare you to make hard this accusation about me: "those are the ones that get really negative".

Kind regards, Vincent

[IAHM-COL]

On 5/15/2016 2:15 AM, Israel Hernandez wrote:
viewtopic.php?f=32&t=520

I didn't quite get to the end before I replied to you, all still holds true with the exception of one thing.

I understand you animosity towards some, unfortunately I don't feel the same way. I take Thorsten at face value as I do you. He has NEVER given me a reason to doubt him. He can be direct and to the point to a fault. Obviously many think it to be rude. But I have a different take on it and won't even try to impart my view of him on anyone. Suffice it to say he is also my friend.

I have never met a friend who I didn't find some kind of fault in.

"I hope you will continue to try and take the highest ground even if others don't."

I may have to pull this back after reading

"Back to the beginning of this circle. The problem seems you have been believing Thorsten bullshit way too much"

This is what make reconciliation impossible. Even the postings after yours talk about it and how we all need to build on the positives and drag up the negatives. I firmly believe all chances are lost when it goes there. Unfortunately the most disgruntled have a tendency to cast that first stone. I told you before I thought others we're bringing you down into the mud.

Anyway, just wanted to say that.

[IAHM-COL]

Hi Wllbragg. Reconciliation is possible. So I wont be alarmist. I dont hold grudges.

The reason what I call it "bullshit" is because I assume he is not speaking really what he thinks on a few things. In other words, I feel he is using buzzwords for leverage of getting a point accross, that he knows, beforehand, is not a true point.

The first one of those that you raised is that FGMEMBERS is a fork of Flightgear.
Curtis have been talking around this Fork and hostile fork kind of thought.
Far from reality.

Indeed, Hooray's proposal of we compiling modified binaries of FGFS and distributing those would be an effective rebrandment and forking of FG. I said many times since Thorsten brought such argument that nothing far from the thruth. Really, I am not a developer, and in our group I dont think we have any developer interested in modifying the source code of FGFS to make a different type of FG (of any kind)

We are just as your average Joe that Downloads FG from the webpages, as we are right now on 2016.2, and use it. With whatever new flash it may come.

Thorsten insists in calling FGMEMBERS a fork, which now is echoed by Bugman and Curtis. This insisting, in spite of my showing it is not the case is where I find Thorsten not only, not interesting in backing up a mute-point, but interested in spreading an idea even thou he knows it is not true. I find it to be acting like with the intent of planting a rumor on the public's ear: "Repeat something enough times for it to become true".

Once being Clear that FGMEMBERS has not forked FG, Thorsten repetition and echoing comes to me as nothing short of BS.

And you asked: How far is FGMEMBERS from Forking FG? My answer to you is: You have been believing the Forking fallacy lately? We are as close or as far as anyone else in the world from Forking FG. As an opensource project, the option is there, clearly, but it requires manpower, resources, coding knowledge (groupwise), and a clear interest to do so. We lack the need and thus the motivation.

Secondly. The Competition thing. This is just silly. Thorsten had been repeating this one in round-abouts. Its like a gramophone jumping on an scratched vinyl. It's a repeated non-sense pattern that quickly gets tiring. How do we compete? What are the rules of competition? How are we suppose to be fair at winning and give fair chance of loosing? What's such competition goal? Etc. Having FGMEMBERS is nothing short of providing additional content to FG and any user willing to take it. It's open. It's available. It's GPL, and copylefted. We copy FGADDon content, and if FGADDon content wants it, it can take it as well. The highway is both ways. But the question that the flow of information is mostly unilateral is nothing short of Torsten (D) guilt, when he vetoed. He did not establish a competition, he just set us free to go (and develop).

On this topic, again, I wish reconciliation is possible, (if I may) because many of the developers would yearn their content to be available to the general mass of the community (reads as available both in FGMEMBERS as in FGADDon); We honestly want the core to acknowledge what we do and take it. We can't spoon feed it anymore (nor gavage). As you know I insisted so hard on this, that Curtis found pertinent to cut me from the devel list.

So, again. The competition theme. Another nonsense.

I hope you can understand.

Best,
Israel

[bomber]

I understand you animosity towards some, unfortunately I don't feel the same way. I take Thorsten at face value as I do you. He has NEVER given me a reason to doubt him. He can be direct and to the point to a fault. Obviously many think it to be rude. But I have a different take on it and won't even try to impart my view of him on anyone. Suffice it to say he is also my friend.

I'm all those things but he doesn't treat me in the same way...

I have a PM from gsagostinho, and the above roughly about sums up how he felt about Thortsen at the time

I however see it more like this....

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

[KL-666]

That whole discussion at that other forum is really going nowhere. 5 pages per day, i can hardly keep up. Same repetition of the mantras. Fg people claiming that the others are of bad intent. And the fgmembers trying to show they are not of bad intent, just having a different opinion.

Surely this goes nowhere, if no one wants to see some positive in the other and get closer. Yet the knee jerk calls i have seen to close the subject are of old politics. No, the participants themselves should recognize that they are too stubborn to get anywhere with each other.

Just think of one simple question: What do you want to reach with your arguing? Are you reaching it? Or are you at a stale mate? Btw. it would be interesting to see both sides state their intention of what they want to achieve. This is surely least of all just interesting, but it can be of great help for both sides to think of where they can meet the other.

Kind regards, Vincent