Vision for Kubuntu

[Xen]

Oh, one thing I wanted to say, that I forgot:

Xen schreef op 25-10-2016 1:40:

>> But you fail to realize that this is also part of how projects are
>> run. In fact, it is a fundamental duty of the admins to encourage
>> work that advances the project's mission and reject the rest.
> 
> I don't disagree with that. Not "exclusively". That is to say, I do
> not agree with it entirely, but I do also not disagree with it
> entirely.
> 
> The point is that they want to "own" their product like a company does.



It is understandable that people are not interested in ideas they do not 
understand or have no interest in.

Part of selling a product (or an idea) is pitching a product (or an 
idea).

Pitching means getting someone interested in something they don't yet 
know.

However because these are corporate channels we are in they have a 
specific purpose:

- the dev channel is for development purposes from within the company, 
not for outsiders

- the user channel is for user support, not for anything else, really.

At least that is the purpose within the missive.

So in fact these are not actually channels you can use to pitch an idea.

Where then?

It is an "open company" where a number of channels are public discourse. 
Yet they are still dedicated channels for specific purposes so they 
jealously guard their channels for fear someone abuses it.

You are not supposed to talk "openly" in these channels: it is for a 
specific purpose and this is not it.

How else are you going to reach the project? You can't. There are no 
other channels you can use for that.

Where is the place users can freely talk? It doesn't exist. Even the 
Ubuntu forums are dedicated for "support". One is actually allowed to 
say much more on a real corporate forum.

So since any idea you would pitch would be something new and would take 
away (or add to, but at least, differ from) the current offering, it 
kinda bites when you try to pitch a product in a PUBLIC channel that 
everyone can see and that is SUPPOSED to be about the MAIN product.

In private it wouldn't have mattered much -- idealy, at least.

But en publique it is not a wanted thing.

I can't help that, but it is not a wanted thing. This is a hobby 
company, and it is not a wanted thing.

It is like pitching a new idea on someone's facebook channel -- some 
corporation, some large corporation's Facebook. They won't like that, 
you know. Then why do you do that?

I don't do that on a company's Facebook. I cannot influence a company, 
that is their own thing. A company usually also owns their product, I 
can't change that.

However if I had business proposals I would do it in private.

That won't work here, there is no one with that job description.

We are "left without recourse" (sin remedio).

And this is a reason why it is principally impossible to get anyone 
interested in a new idea here.

That means -- it is also simply because the mind blocks new ideas in 
these channels -- the ego won't have it. These channels are not meant 
for new idea, so we won't hear it. Logical.

So that means it becomes impossible in the Ubuntu world to give any new 
idea life. It can't be done.

Because the public channels that you will need to use are hostile to it.

And the channels that wouldn't be hostile don't exist.

It's all logical and perhaps you can't blame anyone but it is all the 
result of this hobbying while pretending to be an open source community, 
you know.

Debian also does it, by the way, to some extent, pretty much.

I only wanted to write this additional mail to explain how difficult it 
is to even make people understand what it is you are trying to do or to 
enthuse people for that.

You get *no* enthusiasm whatsoever, no matter what you do.

Even if you say that something doesn't work and you suggest perhaps an 
alternative ---> hostility.

Always the same.

Always hostility. You can't suggest anything. Always hostility.

There is no way to make a creative inroad. It is like a forest floor 
where every falling seed is removed. Ardently. Consistently. 
Conscientiously, you might say. But also, you could say "Sterilely".

To me that means the whole model of Ubuntu is bankrupt, but yeah.

Take from it what you will.














> 
> And we all shy away from companies because they are evil, right? Well,
> not so, because they are doing exactly the same here (and elsewhere).
> So we have a company, that's a given. It is not a financial or
> economical company, but it is still a company, even if it is just
> Kubuntu here (and the people that obviously run it).
> 
> A regular company will also not allow you to influence the direction
> of the product. Also not here, even though that is supposed to be the
> whole intent (that you can contribute, etc.).
> 
> Anyway, all of this is nice and philosophical, but it doesn't really 
> help much.
> 
> The point remains that this is not a community. This is not a
> collaborative project (except within the company itself).
> 
> Ubuntu is also not a community. Debian is a community, yes, but Ubuntu 
> isn't.
> 
> Debian has a constitution. Ubuntu doesn't have a constitution. It has
> a code of conduct, but that is not the same.
> 
> You can't influence Kubuntu, you cannot add to Kubuntu, you cannot do
> anything for Kubuntu. Perhaps you can find a vocation (vacation) if
> you can do some website work, but again, talk precedes doing, and if
> they don't like your work, you are done.
> 
> What else can I say? I can't say anything, and that was the whole
> intent, probably.
> 
> Sorry about that. See ya.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> [snip]