An Open Letter to Curt Olson

[bomber]

Hooray....

I don't take 90% of what you write seriously.. but here's the thing with the MP comment you made..

If you're now telling us we're not to take what you wrote seriously we are left with it being one of two things... either it's an attempt at humour or its a deliberate act of goading, trolling in Internet parlance.

Deliberately trolling this community is in breach of the rules isn't it ?

[KL-666]

Ouch, that must mean a ban for at least a month, for so much trolling by Hooray. Where is Bugman when he is needed most?

Kind regards, Vincent

[bomber]

Thorsten,

The problems I have with you usually occur when you make counter-to-fact statements (I remember discussing some physics issues with you where you, in the face of the equations solved in front of you, argued that you trust your methods over the equations). Admittedly I have a problem with that kind of attitude.

But I didn't dispute the equations you wrote I simply stated as you've said that I prefer to trust my methods..

What is so wrong with this...

My methods use recognisable equations that in all the years of having a flight model posted up has never been questioned by others or yourself....

The example you've posted is an example of 'more than one way of solving a problem' and you Thorsten going hell bent to create arguments and friction within this community because it's not how you'd do it.

Well done , you've proved my point about you.... thanks.

Simon.

[bomber]

Thorsten wrote in Mon May 02, 2016 8:34 am:

What is so wrong with this...

What's wrong with flat-out disbelieving a math argument in the context of flight dynamics? Pretty much everything, flight dynamics is applied math.

I did NOT flat-out disbelieve your maths argument I simply stated I preffered to use a different one for my flight modelling.

Jsbsim allows for multiple ways of solving problems.

[KL-666]

Well at least there is still someone out there with a sense of humor.

https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=29424&sid=90ed44157fd89be72f9a0b00c4a21b0f&start=30#p284019

Re: Mumble trolling

Postby Hooray » Mon May 02, 2016 2:35 pm

I honestly appreciate the partial cross-posting going on over at the jbw forum - seems like you folks are now about to censor things you don't want to be read over there

Humor helps against wanting to kill each other in a heated debate.

I also appreciate Curt's wise words about building bridges (the second next post). But he must have missed the start of this debate, when he is saying that people come over to start some immature bickering. It was Thorsten's immature attack at an unsuspecting newcomer, that triggered people in his defense.

Kind regards, Vincent

[bomber]

"I honestly appreciate the partial cross-posting going on over at the jbw forum - seems like you folks are now about to censor things you don't want to be read over there "

Come off it Hooray.... I'm cross posting all my posts because of the censorship here...

Hooray wrote

"you know, there's the impression that the multiplayer environment is attracting the kind of people that are causing tons of work, and headaches, without these people contributing in any meaningful/visible way other than causing havoc"

Let's nail this bit of trolling for what it is..... NOT a fact but a personal or group of persons opinion on the value of a portion of this community. .

[bomber]

"I would love to see more attempts at bridge building within our community. More bridges would create far more opportunities to resolve problems like this."

And there being private discussions of closing down MP with public threats of doing so...... is what, an example of bridge building ?

You wish to see the problems resolved ?

Close the mailing list and let's see the discussions and decisions being made here instead of having a divided community. ..

And also can I suggest you muzzle your dogs because they're biting great chunks out of this community with their lies and accusations

[Lydiot]

Followed by the trickery of Hooray:

http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=29424&p=284003&sid=b93cb7602855a192698758ee823df3bb#p284003

regarding the MP comment I made, that was just an observation - and one that seems to make sense. However, like bugman said already, it's unlikely to ever happen for obvious reasons; it would be really hard to pull off, even if all people agreed to do so, it would still not be possible to actually implement ...

Makes sense does it not? No, it does not either, so do not fall for it (and certainly not in private).

Now "behind the scenes" is played down as if it was all in Hoorays mind and nothing happened behind the scenes. Further he is trying a decoy manoeuvre by starting to talk about the feasibility of ripping out MP. There is no issue with that, but with the fact that it was discussed at all and even behind the scenes. Do not forget what is happening to all the fgmembers references from behind the scenes.

Kind regards, Vincent

There's actually some nuance in his post, and it is of value. I think it's getting lost right now. What I take from it is that more people have been drawn to the project, and because of that the project has seen more people that don't have the same technical knowledge about the code. And because of that there's been more friction. The friction has thus increased because the community has increased because more people are drawn to it (using MP for example). But that doesn't mean that MP is the cause for friction, it's just natural.

Also, last in his post, he wrote "ironically, and funnily, also in line with the recent github/workflow related discussion taking place on the devel list, initiated by David Megginson (former fgfs core dev), because those comments could be viewed, by some, as matching what fgmembers is trying to do some extent (at least technically, with e.g. terragit)." If I understand that correctly it seems like a bit of a concession. Shouldn't that be acknowledged an emphasized?

[KL-666]

Hello Lydiot,

I was not busy saying that all of the post was bad. I was making a completely different argument with a correctly used part of that post (the experience in debating point). No, i'm always for building bridges and giving credit when it is deserved, you may see that in my last post too. But it is terribly hard to accomplish to get on speaking terms, if Curt's dogs are not muzzled and continuously bite (as Bomber put it). Thorsten is one of the worst. With him there will always be inexplicable attacks, of which others feel the need to get to the defense. He also started this one.

So we do not differ much in opinion, we only make different arguments with the same piece.

[edit]
Just wanted to add, that it was half a step forward that the fighting dogs were split. But leaving some mad dogs at the other forum will forever infuriate the others on grounds of using double standards. In return infuriating the mad dogs still at the other forum. And there are other unfortunate impracticalities like mentioned above. To normalize relations, it can only work if Thorsten and some others are removed from the other forum too, for at least a while.

Or maybe it is not a bad idea to have a neutral platform (forum), where people looking for peaceful cooperation can work together, without being bitten by the dogs of either side.

Thinking longer about it, i can get quite enthusiastic of such neutral platform. Moderators can come from both sides, approved by tho other side. Maybe someone like SkyBoat can gain approval from flightgear, and the other way around Johan might be a possibility (if he is still there). The moderators must always agree before taking action (i truly believe reasonable people can, without becoming prejudiced by what their peer groups yell). There is no admission for known fighting dogs, and one paramount rule: "The one that starts a fight is out".
[/edit]

Kind regards, Vincent

[IAHM-COL]

I would love to see more attempts at bridge building within our community. More bridges would create far more opportunities to resolve problems like this.

You are the one that had burned bridges of communication by preventing some of us (including me) to participate openly in the devel list and your Forum -- and never responding my emails.
I agree, I dissent sometimes. But I always present technical solutions.
Anytime that you are ready and willing to re-stablish communication, I, and we (FGMEMBERS) are more than willing to make executive decisions needed not only to bridge some gaps, but to create solid foundations of cooperation based on equality of treatment and respect to the other's opinion. Are you wiling to give and take? Are you ready to make executive decisions on your side as well?

No more "I beg you to stop"s, cartoonish ridicules, or hang down the phones. No more bans. In fact there are two bans you are late to revert.

If you are willing to ammend this ridiculous two camp situation you are, again, welcome to shell yourself out of that egg and open the communication as the software is, and be open to the idea of accepting some infrastructure such as FGMEMBERS and FGMEMBERS-TERRAGIT in your domains.

I will be happy to see you moving forward to re-establish communication and show some hint of leadership. I am willing to talk personally with you via phone, or chats.

Best,
IAHM-COL