Anonymous
6/25/2025, 6:44:23 PM No.105701792
Why are Gnomeniggers such assholes?
According to ChatGPT:
Who’s not being an asshole:
* **The OP (Desperate\_Fig\_1296):**
The OP raised a reasonable and fairly common frustration: GNOME isn’t easy for newcomers who expect a more familiar interface. He argued for optionality and wider appeal, which is a valid user-experience concern. While his tone leaned a bit dramatic (“GNOME will remain with a limited community”), it wasn’t hostile or entitled. It came from a desire to improve accessibility.
Who’s bordering on asshole behavior:
* **Some of the commenters who mock the idea of user choice or community input:**
A few replies leaned toward *gatekeeping* or *condescension* — e.g., telling users to “just go somewhere else” or mocking the idea of “choice” as naïve. Comments like *“FOSS is not a democracy”* are true in principle, but when delivered dismissively, they can alienate users who genuinely want to engage with and improve the system.
For example:
* One user argued users don’t get to “dictate” how developers work — which is fine — but did so in a tone that felt more like “sit down and shut up” than “thanks for the suggestion, but here’s how the project operates.”
* Others ridiculed the idea of a dock as something only "newbs" would want.
That said, **most commenters** still kept things civil and made thoughtful counterpoints about design philosophy, maintenance, and project vision. The *tone* varied, but outright asshole behavior was rare.
---
TL;DR – If anyone's being an asshole:
* It’s **not the OP** — he’s pushing for user-centric improvements.
* A few **commenters** tread close to being dismissive or elitist, especially when they shut down the discussion without engaging the reasoning behind it.
The best debates involve *respectfully disagreeing*, not treating disagreement as ignorance. GNOME is a project shaped by vision, but that doesn't mean users’ frustrations aren’t valid or worth listening to.
According to ChatGPT:
Who’s not being an asshole:
* **The OP (Desperate\_Fig\_1296):**
The OP raised a reasonable and fairly common frustration: GNOME isn’t easy for newcomers who expect a more familiar interface. He argued for optionality and wider appeal, which is a valid user-experience concern. While his tone leaned a bit dramatic (“GNOME will remain with a limited community”), it wasn’t hostile or entitled. It came from a desire to improve accessibility.
Who’s bordering on asshole behavior:
* **Some of the commenters who mock the idea of user choice or community input:**
A few replies leaned toward *gatekeeping* or *condescension* — e.g., telling users to “just go somewhere else” or mocking the idea of “choice” as naïve. Comments like *“FOSS is not a democracy”* are true in principle, but when delivered dismissively, they can alienate users who genuinely want to engage with and improve the system.
For example:
* One user argued users don’t get to “dictate” how developers work — which is fine — but did so in a tone that felt more like “sit down and shut up” than “thanks for the suggestion, but here’s how the project operates.”
* Others ridiculed the idea of a dock as something only "newbs" would want.
That said, **most commenters** still kept things civil and made thoughtful counterpoints about design philosophy, maintenance, and project vision. The *tone* varied, but outright asshole behavior was rare.
---
TL;DR – If anyone's being an asshole:
* It’s **not the OP** — he’s pushing for user-centric improvements.
* A few **commenters** tread close to being dismissive or elitist, especially when they shut down the discussion without engaging the reasoning behind it.
The best debates involve *respectfully disagreeing*, not treating disagreement as ignorance. GNOME is a project shaped by vision, but that doesn't mean users’ frustrations aren’t valid or worth listening to.
Replies:
