Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 28th Dec 2008 10:43 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 341913
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
Exactly what about what I said did you find bizarre? I didn't say anything about bending any will or expecting something like that. What I said is arrogant was to default to the assumption that other people don't want what they say they want. (That is often the case, but one should never assume it without strong indications of it.)
And as for the "problem" which I tried to highlight (but which you perhaps didn't understand); it's that while the devs may ignore bitching users the devs are unjustly labeling users as "bitching users" even when there is (virtually) no cause for it.
Who has suggested to threaten devs with anything? Implying that getting one feature implemented into gimp isn't worth as much to one single user as the money for 10 photoshop-licences, even if the user could afford it but really can't, can hardly be regarded as "threatening".
The fact is that the "Then pay someone else to implement it!"-way just doesn't work with normal people, and although developers know it some still continue to use that card for some reason (perhaps to assert their dominance or to highlight their indifference or who knows?)