Mark Shuttleworth dictator of life?

[sudoer541]

Why Mark Shuttleworth is right? Ubuntu is not a democrasy (http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/03/why-mark-shuttleworth-is-right-ubuntu.html) and nor should it be!

What do you think?

[doas777]

hey, if he's footin the bill...

[madjr]

Why Mark Shuttleworth is right? Ubuntu is not a democrasy (http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/03/why-mark-shuttleworth-is-right-ubuntu.html) and nor should it be!

What do you think?

well democracy still has it's flaws

we only get to choose a temp team (president/congress) to avoid (too much) corruption

then they take ALL the decisions, we literally never take part on that.

if they wanna blow up the world we cant really stop em

------

however the ubuntu team does listen (almost every time) and most of the implemented features are old brainstorms

we cant implement it all

democracy cant make all happy either

nuff said ^^

[madjr]

end of discussion everyone happy now:

http://go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X1342&site=ubuntulife.wordpress.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fubuntulife.files.wordpress.com%2F 2010%2F03%2Fsoluciondefinitivamockup.png

link (http://ubuntulife.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/la-solucion-definitiva-al-problema-de-los-botones/)

[wersdaluv]

I love meritocracy

[_h_]

end of discussion everyone happy now:

http://go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X1342&site=ubuntulife.wordpress.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fubuntulife.files.wordpress.com%2F 2010%2F03%2Fsoluciondefinitivamockup.png

link (http://ubuntulife.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/la-solucion-definitiva-al-problema-de-los-botones/)

I don't know how to read spanish. :(

[Rasa1111]

Mark Shuttleworth UBUNTU 1/2 (http://www.metacafe.com/watch/yt-jCz_OXEOrpo/mark_shuttleworth_ubuntu_1_2/)


doesnt quite feel like a dictator to me. lol
he rocks. <3

[wersdaluv]

He's a benevolent dictator, actually...

[Mr. Picklesworth]

well democracy still has it's flaws

we only get to choose a temp team (president/congress) to avoid (too much) corruption

then they take ALL the decisions, we literally never take part on that.

if they wanna blow up the world we cant really stop em


Well, on that topic, my opinion is that the best approach would be a continuing democracy. People could change their vote at any time they want, preventing those many cases where politicians lie to get into power, then immediately change their policies (or cross the floor...).

However, there is an enormous difference between democracy in a software project and democracy in a country. You EXIST in a country; all your money is there, your house is there, your family is there, you probably can attribute a lot of your memories to it, you may have been born there; the country powers your life. The powers that be, then, have the potential (in the wrong hands) to trap you there and control your life directly. It's a significant issue.

Software? This is something you choose. Any one person can possess any number of software products. They do not encapsulate your life; you control THEM. Even proprietary software! It's essentially sandboxed inside whatever segment of the world and your life you explicitly permit it access to.


end of discussion everyone happy now:

*snip*

link (http://ubuntulife.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/la-solucion-definitiva-al-problema-de-los-botones/)

It took me a minute to figure that picture out. Very funny!

I should mention, before anyone screams: that GTK theme is a tad outdated. The scrollbar is lighter now; the pattern on it isn't horribly bulky any more. (Although the arrow icon is still aligned strangely with the text).

[samh785]

well democracy still has it's flaws

we only get to choose a temp team (president/congress) to avoid (too much) corruption

then they take ALL the decisions, we literally never take part on that.

if they wanna blow up the world we cant really stop em


"Democracy is a political (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics) government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government) carried out either directly by the people (direct democracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy)) or by means of elected representatives of the people (Representative democracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracy))." - Wikipedia

You're only referring to representative democracy.

@OP, I think that if Mark is willing to foot the bill for the project, then he should have a high level of control over it. It's worked out well so far hasn't it? :D

[swoll1980]

if they wanna blow up the world we cant really stop em



Sure we can. Control is an illusion. Not only does the American population outnumber the military by an astronomical amount, but you would also have to believe that the solders themselves wouldn't take the side of the people. Even then there would be no way for them to win. We are the government, people forget that. If anything were ever to happen that would force Americans into a revolt. It wouldn't be difficult to get things back in line.

[MasterNetra]

"Democracy is a political (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics) government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government) carried out either directly by the people (direct democracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy)) or by means of elected representatives of the people (Representative democracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracy))." - Wikipedia

You're only referring to representative democracy.

Know of any nation thats ran by a direct democracy? Cause I sure haven't heard of any.


Sure we can. Control is an illusion. Not only does the American population outnumber the military by an astronomical amount, but you would also have to believe that the solders themselves wouldn't take the side of the people. Even then there would be no way for them to win. We are the government, people forget that. If anything were ever to happen that would force Americans into a revolt. It wouldn't be difficult to get things back in line.

True but a lot of people are "sheep" and won't revolt. And plus revolting produces a very messing situation with a number of groups going to attempt to take control, most of which will probably be no better if not worse then those who were in power before hand.

[samh785]

Know of any nation thats ran by a direct democracy? Cause I sure haven't heard of any.
That's a very good point. If you would like to understand why that is the case, I would recommend reading some Noam Chomsky or Howard Zinn.

[wjm]

While I don't personally have an opinion on the matter of the button swapping the argument the author puts forward is what politicians call "Reagan knows best". Basically, changes can and should be made by those we elect (or who are unelected but rule over us anyway) simply based on the fact that they know what's best for us.



And y’know what? There’s nothing wrong in that statement. Relax kids! I trust a qualified doctor to prescribe my medicine based on what he knows. I don’t then expect a poll of the waiting room patients to see whether they agree with him; My trust is in people with interface design backgrounds to choose the best interface and design options.

[unknownPoster]

SABDFLs (Self-Appointed Benevolent Dictator for Life) are fine. Arguably one of the best distributions out there, Slackware, has been developed under this system.

[Frak]

It's one thing to claim Ubuntu is a community distribution and then deny any help based on merit. A true community distribution looks at all possible help, still based on merit I might add (some developers are better than others) but give them all a fair chance.

This is just yet another case of meritocracy.

[ctrlmd]

all this because of little buttons :lolflag:

[KiwiNZ]

Its a case of blast off without being in possession of all of the facts. I love conspiracies they never let fact get in way of a Blog story.

Mark Shuttleworth is the Chairman of Ubuntu and as such fronts decisions. A lot of discusion took place in the design team with regard to the new look , some agreed some did not. A decision was made and the team went with the decision. The Chairman fronts that decision as does the chairman of any organisation.

After the design team who were delegated the task to find a new look had made the decision the task then was to brief the community, that briefing was not calling for votes, was not calling for consensus , it was a briefing to present a decision. This is normal practice in any organisation.

[l-x-l]

He's paying for it.. so I don't see a problem with him making decisions.

[vs8]

+1

I don't believe in democracy. It's all a lie.

[wjm]

Its a case of blast off without being in possession of all of the facts. I love conspiracies they never let fact get in way of a Blog story.

Mark Shuttleworth is the Chairman of Ubuntu and as such fronts decisions. A lot of discusion took place in the design team with regard to the new look , some agreed some did not. A decision was made and the team went with the decision. The Chairman fronts that decision as does the chairman of any organisation.

After the design team who were delegated the task to find a new look had made the decision the task then was to brief the community, that briefing was not calling for votes, was not calling for consensus , it was a briefing to present a decision. This is normal practice in any organisation.

I can't emphasize how little I care about things like button placement over things like btrfs and better 3D support however - I think the problem is like always, in the delivery of the message and how it was perceived as opposed to the actual message itself. Like I said - Reagan knows best :)

[cariboo]

I don't know how to read spanish. :(

Check out the buttons, it took me a second or two to notice. :)

[Rasa1111]

all this because of little buttons :lolflag:
:lol: really.

[Post Monkeh]

true democracy doesn't work because most people are stupid and can only think of themselves or their own agenda rather than the big picture.
people in power have the responsibility to make decisions, sometimes people don't like the decisions, but you can't call a decision wrong until it's been proven wrong.
sometimes the decision making process needs clarified a bit, people's views should be listened to, but at the end of the day, someone has to make a call and you never make a change that EVERYONE is happy with.
i'll be moving the buttons back to the right.

[GeoPrude]

I think he's a clever man who appears to have lost touch with the larger community somewhat.

[KiwiNZ]

I think he's a clever man who appears to have lost touch with the larger community somewhat.

He meets with Developers , programmers, OEMS, Manufacturers, Government Departments, User Groups, LUGS, Schools, Universities, Conferences, the man on the street. That is quite wide .

[RaZe42]

Know of any nation thats ran by a direct democracy? Cause I sure haven't heard of any.

http://www.google.fi/search?aq=0&oq=switzerland+direct+democra&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=switzerland+direct+democracy :)

[Zlatan]

yeah Mike definitely has to deal with more than existing community if he's going to fix bug #1


He meets with Developers , programmers, OEMS, Manufacturers, Government Departments, User Groups, LUGS, Schools, Universities, Conferences, the man on the street. That is quite wide .

[Shpongle]

Know of any nation thats ran by a direct democracy? Cause I sure haven't heard of any.



True but a lot of people are "sheep" and won't revolt. And plus revolting produces a very messing situation with a number of groups going to attempt to take control, most of which will probably be no better if not worse then those who were in power before hand.

this , its the indirect control that is worse!, most people wont realize until its too late and then they legally cant do anything about it.

on topic its all good so far . . & there is always choice

[Regenweald]

I think he's a clever man who appears to have lost touch with the larger community somewhat.

The user base is growing, Ubuntu is getting support from OEMs and the OS itself gets better every release. Thankfully he seems to have lost touch with those who would limit access to linux to a wider audience because it make them feel smarter or part of some kind of computing aristocracy.

Ubuntu has a very large community, but using an OS or joining a mailing list or giving some advice on a forum does not immediately give one the right to micromanage every decision made in the free OS given to you.

Fedora went to nouveau exclusively when 3d support was not even viable, and installing the nvidia binary required jumping through hoops. I did not notice any worldwide knickers in a twist then.

How is it that only Ubuntu suffers with such a widespread and far reaching sense of entitlement syndrome ?

[GeoPrude]

...and the OS itself gets better every release...

Shouldn't it always be that way?

IMO it seems like he has become isolated to the purely business side of ubuntu, and doesn't interact or engage enough with the wider community, namely the users.
Also, the community aspect is somewhat at odds with comments like "this is not a democracy", not to mention the whole SABDFL thing. They are contradicting points.

[l-x-l]

Since when did community = democracy? They are not the same.

[Frak]

Since when did community = democracy? They are not the same.
Hey, if you have a suggestion, that's great. Though, we aren't going to listen to you if you have an opinion.

[lyceum]

If America has proven anything it is that there are no democracies, there are only loud people that troll over the quiet passive people. Shuttleworth is right to do what he does and say what he said. Do I disagree with some Ubuntu direction? Yes. Do I have a say? Not really. Does that matter? If it did Ubuntu would fail. The fact that Ubuntu has direction but is still a community is the driving force behind the project's success.

[phrostbyte]

Mark Shuttleworth is the owner of Canonical, the development driver of Ubuntu. He is "dictator" for this reason. People who have a problem with this can spend $10 million dollars of their own money and make their own distro.

[Frak]

Mark Shuttleworth is the owner of Canonical, the development driver of Ubuntu. He is "dictator" for this reason. People who have a problem with this can spend $10 million dollars of their own money and make their own distro.
It's more a problem of not being represented as a consumer. It's as if, if you haven't submitted a code-patch, artwork, documentation, etc. then you are worthless in the eyes of the dev team. Since you didn't buy a support contract, the end user isn't being valued as a consumer, and just a person who decided to download and use Ubuntu. They have not contributed to anything, and they are just freeloaders.

At the end of the day, Shuttleworth will be pandering to these free users, whether he realizes it or not. There will always be die-hards, such as the one who runs OMG! Ubuntu, but there are plenty of others who will change wind as soon as it's obvious they are being ignored.

[GeoPrude]

It's more a problem of not being represented as a consumer. It's as if, if you haven't submitted a code-patch, artwork, documentation, etc. then you are worthless in the eyes of the dev team. Since you didn't buy a support contract, the end user isn't being valued as a consumer, and just a person who decided to download and use Ubuntu. They have not contributed to anything, and they are just freeloaders.

Harsh, but maybe not too far from the truth.

[phrostbyte]

It's more a problem of not being represented as a consumer. It's as if, if you haven't submitted a code-patch, artwork, documentation, etc. then you are worthless in the eyes of the dev team. Since you didn't buy a support contract, the end user isn't being valued as a consumer, and just a person who decided to download and use Ubuntu. They have not contributed to anything, and they are just freeloaders.

At the end of the day, Shuttleworth will be pandering to these free users, whether he realizes it or not. There will always be die-hards, such as the one who runs OMG! Ubuntu, but there are plenty of others who will change wind as soon as it's obvious they are being ignored.

Last time I checked "Microsoft", or "Apple" aren't democracies either. They have a certain limited accountability to their customer base, but ultimately decisions are made by upper management.

If you want to be represented as a "consumer" or someone useful to the Ubuntu project or Canonical as a whole, contribute software, write patches for bugs, or do something that would entitle you to Ubuntu Membership. Being a "Power Ranger" and whining about it on a web forum isn't going do any good.

[GeoPrude]

Last time I checked "Microsoft", or "Apple" aren't democracies either. They have a certain limited accountability to their customer base, but ultimately decisions are made by upper management.

If you want to be represented as a "consumer" or someone useful to the Ubuntu project or Canonical as a whole, contribute software, write patches for bugs, or do something that would entitle you to Ubuntu Membership. Being a "Power Ranger" and whining about it on a web forum isn't going do any good.

Those consumers are the ones Canonical needs to purchase music/software through ubuntu.

[Post Monkeh]

even if you're giving your product away for free, you still need customers, otherwise it's all a bit pointless

[Regenweald]

Hey, if you have a suggestion, that's great. Though, we aren't going to listen to you if you have an opinion.

But an opinion is yours to be had, that will never change. How does having an opinion translate into decision making ? I have many opinions on the state of processor water cooling. Lets say coolit had a forum welcoming community suggestions, I could have an opinion on the plastic used for the radiator housing: Sure black is fine but grey with neon highlights would go better with my case aesthetics, or they changed to some pearl coloured material for thermal reasons and I preferred the good old black. All opinion. If however, I do some engineering research with one of their solutions and provide a point by point analysis and show drastic performance improvements based on my ideas and back it up with some real world data, that is another story altogether.

I don't like colour X or button Y is hardly a democratic standpoint of any consequence.

[phrostbyte]

even if you're giving your product away for free, you still need customers, otherwise it's all a bit pointless

"Paying Consumers" are useful to a project, since the revenue generated can pay for numerous things related to the project.

"Prosumers" are useful to a project, since they don't just consume but contribute back. Virtually all Ubuntu Members are "prosumers".

"Nonpaying Consumers" are completely useless, and in fact, overall a hindrance to a project, since they waste bandwidth and support resources but do or give nothing in return.

Why should Canonical care about "nonpaying consumers"? I don't blame them for establishing a "meritocracy". In fact, I wish the Ubuntu Forums worked the same way, it would be a far better place.

[Frak]

Last time I checked "Microsoft", or "Apple" aren't democracies either. They have a certain limited accountability to their customer base, but ultimately decisions are made by upper management.

If you want to be represented as a "consumer" or someone useful to the Ubuntu project or Canonical as a whole, contribute software, write patches for bugs, or do something that would entitle you to Ubuntu Membership. Being a "Power Ranger" and whining about it on a web forum isn't going do any good.
First off, Microsoft and Apple are guaranteed customers and are required to handle mass communications. Ubuntu has a very tiny user-base, and shouldn't be going down the "corporate oversee" road too soon. If you want to alienate your userbase, this is a great way to do it. Your home users that are just learning how to use a computer may have suggestions. They don't know how to do any of that, and they shouldn't be required to. They should have just as equal an opinion as any developer.

Secondly, hence why I don't use Ubuntu nor do I place any faith in the Ubuntu project. Also, a personal attack coming from a guy that gets angry when somebody attacks Ubuntu, just saying.

[Frak]

Why should Canonical care about "nonpaying consumers"? I don't blame them for establishing a "meritocracy". In fact, I wish the Ubuntu Forums worked the same way, it would be a far better place.

So all the fanboys could up your posts, give you mod access, and you could quiet all of those who have valid discrepancy against Ubuntu. I have way more faith in the current system that guarantees my right to constructive criticism.

[Post Monkeh]

because non paying customers are also your future paying customers, your promotions team, your beta testers, and a very easy way to prove to people that their product is good when they can point to their masive user base.

if you bothered reading what i said earlier instead of going into a rant then you'd realise i said someone had to make the decisions that annoy people, but i'm glad you're not running any business i'm relying on for my future - all your customers are valuable in their own way, and if all the people who "use ubuntu for free" were to disappear, there would be no ubuntu, no matter what your limited foresight is telling you.

[phrostbyte]

because non paying customers are also your future paying customers, your promotions team, your beta testers, and a very easy way to prove to people that their product is good when they can point to their masive user base.

if you bothered reading what i said earlier instead of going into a rant then you'd realise i said someone had to make the decisions that annoy people,

I stand by my point. Nonpaying consumers do not deserve the same voice as someone who actually funds Ubuntu development. On the same vein Ubuntu Members and MOTU and various other people deserve a much bigger voice then nonpaying consumers. If anything, this will encourage these nonpaying consumers to become members or paying consumers, they should not feel like they can get their way for "free".


but i'm glad you're not running any business i'm relying on for my future - all your customers are valuable in their own way, and if all the people who "use ubuntu for free" were to disappear, there would be no ubuntu, no matter what your limited foresight is telling you.

Don't be so sure.

[rottentree]

Could we(or I) get an (official?) answer why the windows buttons were changed? I don't care about the change any more but just want to know the underlying reason.

[Frak]

I stand by my point. Nonpaying consumers do not deserve the same voice as someone who actually funds Ubuntu development. On the same vein Ubuntu Members and MOTU and various other people deserve a much bigger voice then nonpaying consumers. If anything, this will encourage these nonpaying consumers to become members or paying consumers, they should not feel like they can get their way for "free".

Just like how if I want a bigger say in government, I try to become a member of congress. I like the way you think.

[KiwiNZ]

" I don't blame them for establishing a "meritocracy". In fact, I wish the Ubuntu Forums worked the same way, it would be a far better place.

Ubuntu Forums is run like that. If you do not like it membership is not compulsory.

[phrostbyte]

Just like how if I want a bigger say in government, I try to become a member of congress. I like the way you think.

Yes. The USA is meritocratic as well. Politics is opt-in. Those who do not get involved in politics will never get their voice heard.

The ones who gets involved in a deep way about on how the US government is run. Those who fight hard politically have a far larger voice then the average person who only votes every 4 years.

Becoming part of Congress, which ultimately writes and passes the laws that constitute the US government, is close to the ultimate level in this system (which is actually of course, the US President).

[Post Monkeh]

I stand by my point. Nonpaying consumers do not deserve the same voice as someone who actually funds Ubuntu development. On the same vein Ubuntu Members and MOTU and various other people deserve a much bigger voice then nonpaying consumers. If anything, this will encourage these nonpaying consumers to become members or paying consumers, they should not feel like they can get their way for "free".



Don't be so sure.

you have a serious case of ***-kiss-itis.

bad attitudes regarding customers are NOT a good business model when your whole philosophy is supposed to be based on being a community.

i don't even think MS was totally dismissing everyone's views anyway, he was just saying that people will be able to provide their opinions, but the final decision will not be made by the community by way of a vote, but by the people in charge of the decision.
you, however, have a stinking attitude towards valuable users and i just hope no one ever puts you in a position where you have to deal with complaining customers, because you would fail miserably.

[phrostbyte]

Ubuntu Forums is run like that. If you do not like it membership is not compulsory.

I think the UF system would work really well if UF was really small. Large forum/community sites tend to move to self-moderation, or a moderation/self-moderation hybrid system.

I'm thinking more of a system where the more people who you help in the support forums, the better "standing" you have on the forums. Similar to some other support sites (eg: StackOverflow). People with high standing should be able to vote to "lock" or "unlock" a thread for instance, or to hide posts (I don't believe in actively deleting/jailing thing, only collapsing/fading out posts, and perhaps highlighting really good posts).

90% of my posts are in the Cafe and I still would strongly support a system like this being implemented. Again, it really works for a lot of other support sites. I don't see why it wouldn't work for UF. It will also encourage people to hang out in the support forums more often.

[phrostbyte]

you have a serious case of ***-kiss-itis.

bad attitudes regarding customers are NOT a good business model when your whole philosophy is supposed to be based on being a community.

i don't even think MS was totally dismissing everyone's views anyway, he was just saying that people will be able to provide their opinions, but the final decision will not be made by the community by way of a vote, but by the people in charge of the decision.
you, however, have a stinking attitude towards valuable users and i just hope no one ever puts you in a position where you have to deal with complaining customers, because you would fail miserably.

I've been in positions where I had to deal with complaining customers. And I'll let you in a secret, the top Fortune 500 companies work not that differently. When they get a complaint, they tend to judge the value of the customer before acting on that complaint.

There is a book that is popular with some big CEOs called "Angel Customers and Demon Customers". I suggest you read it, it's a pretty good book on this topic.

[GeoPrude]

I think the UF system would work really well if UF was really small. Large forum/community sites tend to move to self-moderation, or a moderation/self-moderation hybrid system.

I'm thinking more of a system where the more people who you help in the support forums, the better "standing" you have on the forums. Similar to some other support sites (eg: StackOverflow). People with high standing should be able to vote to "lock" or "unlock" a thread for instance, or to hide posts (I don't believe in actively deleting/jailing thing, only collapsing/fading out posts, and perhaps highlighting really good posts).

90% of my posts are in the Cafe and I still would strongly support a system like this being implemented. Again, it really works for a lot of other support sites. I don't see why it wouldn't work for UF. It will also encourage people to hang out in the support forums more often.

Elitism.


Sorry little Johnny Noob, you can't ask how to fix your WIFI until you write a detailed post explaining the best way to recompile a kernel

[phrostbyte]

Elitism.

Canonical won't even talk to you until you pay them $200+, I guess that's elitism too right? No, that's business.

[KiwiNZ]

If every decision that needs to be made for Ubuntu had to be made by consensus even one as Earth shattering as the default background or for the position of buttons then Ubuntu would like so many Distributions before wither and die.

If Linux is to move beyond the 1.5% it needs to grow beyond the comune mentality.

Decisions will be made having regard to the greater picture, that is a fact of life.

[GeoPrude]

Canonical won't even talk to you until you pay them $200+, I guess that's elitism too right? No, that's business.

Nice try.

The comment was a response to your post, as you can maybe figure out by the fact that I quoted it.

[phrostbyte]

Nice try.

The comment was a response to your post, as you can maybe figure out by the fact that I quoted it.

Well what are you saying? That StackOverflow is elitist? I agree. Some of the best and most intelligent people I know have high point values. I view that as a good thing. It means the system is working.

I guess we can all pretend everyone is the same and equal at everything but that never works in the real world. It's a fairy tale.

[GeoPrude]

Well what are you saying? That StackOverflow is elitist? I agree. Some of the best and most intelligent people I know have high point values. I view that as a good thing. It means the system is working.

I guess we can all pretend everyone is the same and equal at everything but that never works in the real world. It's a fairy tale.

Are you a member of the FSF by any chance?

[KiwiNZ]

Are you a member of the FSF by any chance?

Enough!

Get back on topic . This is not personal

[oldsoundguy]

Back to the original thread

Canonical is a corporation run buy a board of directors and not publicly owned. That board of directors (including Shuttleworth) have every right to run THEIR business as they see fit. If they make a wrong decision, they will pay the price.

Think about it this way .. if you have a company that makes a box, and some clown comes in off the street and tells you he doesn't like the way you are making that box, WOULD YOU LISTEN TO HIM? ESPECIALLY when there is a line up of buyers for that box AS IS also standing in front of you? Think not.
Businesses can do as they wish as long as they do no harm (and some of that gets through .. bankers and health insurance executives, for instance).

There is no such thing as a DEMOCRATICALLY run business unless the workers are the stock holders in the company and have voting rights. So even then, Joe Sixpack STILL can not tell them how to run their shop! (he can SUGGEST, but not TELL them!)

IF you want to change how Canonical builds Ubuntu and related software, then start programming and quit crying the blues! In other words, CONTRIBUTE to the development. Otherwise, hang on for the ride.

[ankspo71]

The feedback on the window button was not appreciated as a whole? or am I reading that wrong? I can understand not appreciating some of the comments (because I have read through some of them), but some of us used constructive feedback to help them move forward in support of their decision. At the moment, the only way I can support Ubuntu is through bug reporting, offering to help others, and forum feedback... which is why I jumped in on those conversations.

I do support Ubuntu's decision, and I support Ubuntu wanting to be unique, I just haven't mentioned it yet, but as seen in my other posts, I feel that the transition from right to left isn't yet quite finished. Now that I see there are 13+ developers on the appearance end of things, I'm not as concerned about it now, because I know the job will get done. Personally speaking, I like being unique, and the window button change makes that easier for me. :P

I like to think of Mark Shuttleworth as management, not as a dictator or head of a democracy. As much as I feel most people here have valid concerns about the window buttons (from the ones I have read I mean), I think the whole situation has gotten blown out of proportion.

[Post Monkeh]

I've been in positions where I had to deal with complaining customers. And I'll let you in a secret, the top Fortune 500 companies work not that differently. When they get a complaint, they tend to judge the value of the customer before acting on that complaint.

There is a book that is popular with some big CEOs called "Angel Customers and Demon Customers". I suggest you read it, it's a pretty good book on this topic.

i don't need to read a book to understand when someone is supporting a position purely based on sycophancy.

canonical aren't in any position to decide that their largest user base (ie the non paying customers) are worthless, nor do i think they would do it anyway.


anyway, back to topic, if every decision was open to the public vote there would never be anything done, but it's important to listen to the masses and take their opinions on board when making decisions.

[NCLI]

In my opinion, a good meritocracy is way better than even the best of democracies, since Joe Sixpack and his friends don't get a say in foreign policy and the likes. Instead, it is handled by those who are best at the subject.

Unfortunately, a bad meritocracy can quickly turn into an aristocracy, which can turn into a dictatorship.

On topic: I think Mark can do whatever he wants with Ubuntu, and I'll use something else if I disagree too much. So far, I don't.

[Post Monkeh]

The feedback on the window button was not appreciated as a whole? or am I reading that wrong? I can understand not appreciating some of the comments (because I have read through some of them), but some of us used constructive feedback to help them move forward in support of their decision. At the moment, the only way I can support Ubuntu is through bug reporting, offering to help others, and forum feedback... which is why I jumped in on those conversations.

I do support Ubuntu's decision, and I support Ubuntu wanting to be unique, I just haven't mentioned it yet, but as seen in my other posts, I feel that the transition from right to left isn't yet quite finished. Now that I see there are 13+ developers on the appearance end of things, I'm not as concerned about it now, because I know the job will get done. Personally speaking, I like being unique, and the window button change makes that easier for me. :P

I like to think of Mark Shuttleworth as management, not as a dictator or head of a democracy. As much as I feel most people here have valid concerns about the window buttons (from the ones I have read I mean), I think the whole situation has gotten blown out of proportion.
he's a self appointed dictator, so he can't really complain when people start rebelling ;)

[phrostbyte]

i don't need to read a book to understand when someone is supporting a position purely based on sycophancy.

No, I'm supporting a position based something called "reality". It's how the world currently works, not some kind of highly communist ideal where everyone is perfectly equal in merit.



canonical aren't in any position to decide that their largest user base (ie the non paying customers) are worthless, nor do i think they would do it anyway.

They might not be worthless, but the average MOTU for instance, is worth a lot more to them then some random bloke on a forum. It doesn't take any real skill or intelligence to complaign about something, but unfortunately it does to actually do something about it. And the MOTU, Ubuntu Members, Canonical employees, these are the people who actually do stuff to improve Ubuntu. Paying customers do indirectly, so they deserve a bigger voice as well.



anyway, back to topic, if every decision was open to the public vote there would never be anything done, but it's important to listen to the masses and take their opinions on board when making decisions.

He 'listened' and decided it was not worth taking action on.

[Ralob]

I don't like how it seems like he doesn't care about how users feel about decisions. But, that is why there are many distributions of Linux besides Ubuntu. If the dictator begins to lose sight of the community too much, I will switch to something else. I don't think it has gotten to that point, and I really hope it doesn't. It would be unfortunate to have to do so, but I would not lose sleep over it. Easy as pie.

[Post Monkeh]

"Paying Consumers" are useful to a project, since the revenue generated can pay for numerous things related to the project.

"Prosumers" are useful to a project, since they don't just consume but contribute back. Virtually all Ubuntu Members are "prosumers".

"Nonpaying Consumers" are completely useless, and in fact, overall a hindrance to a project, since they waste bandwidth and support resources but do or give nothing in return.

Why should Canonical care about "nonpaying consumers"? I don't blame them for establishing a "meritocracy". In fact, I wish the Ubuntu Forums worked the same way, it would be a far better place.


Canonical won't even talk to you until you pay them $200+, I guess that's elitism too right? No, that's business.


No, I'm supporting a position based something called "reality". It's how the world currently works, not some kind of highly communist ideal where everyone is perfectly equal in merit.



They might not be worthless, but the average MOTU for instance, is worth a lot more to them then some random bloke on a forum. It doesn't take any real skill or intelligence to complaign about something, but unfortunately it does to actually do something about it. And the MOTU, Ubuntu Members, Canonical employees, these are the people who actually do stuff to improve Ubuntu. Paying customers do indirectly, so they deserve a bigger voice as well.



He 'listened' and decided it was not worth taking action on.

i'm confused here. do you think or do you not think that non paying customers should have their opinions listened to?

[phrostbyte]

i'm confused here. do you think or do you not think that non paying customers should have their opinions listened to?

Yes, but only because they might become future paying customers or prosumers. If it becomes obvious that there is no chance of either of these occurring with a group or individual, there is absolutely no point for Canonical to waste their resources.

Even so, listening to the current paying consumers is more important then "potential" paying consumers. These are people paying you money right now, you better listen to them.

And again, it's not just about payment. An average MOTU is worth a lot more then most paying consumers, even if he/she hasn't paid Canonical a dime. Ubuntu Members should also have a highly disproportionate say in Ubuntu developments vs Ubuntu users. Upstream developer opinions should also be respected and heard.

I know it's not all "feel good happy-ville", but these are the opinions of people who actually matter. Because without them, Ubuntu wouldn't be possible for anyone.

[Post Monkeh]

Yes, but only because they might become future paying customers or prosumers. If it becomes obvious that there is no chance of either of these occurring with a group or individual, there is absolutely no point for Canonical to waste their resources.

Even so, listening to the current paying consumers is more important then "potential" paying consumers. These are people paying you money right now, you better listen to them.

And again, it's not just about payment. An average MOTU is worth a lot more then most paying consumers, even if he/she hasn't paid Canonical a dime. Ubuntu Members should also have a highly disproportionate say in Ubuntu developments vs Ubuntu users. Upstream developer opinions should also be respected and heard.

can't disagree with anything there except i think all customers should be listened to regardless of what they contribute. maybe all someone does is complain, so their opinions obviously aren't going to rank too highly.
your posts about the worthlessness of non paying customers made me think you thought they should just be ignored all together.
of course there's an order of merit, the non paying, non contributing users shouldn't have as much say as someone else who's donating time and/or money, but the devs should still be listening to what they say, even if only to gauge public opinion.

[RabbitWho]

Anyone who does not agree with his statement is a lunatic.

If I go into a bakery and i think they should use another type of cream I can say, "hey, why don't you use Dawn cream instead of CMP cream" and if they think it's a good idea they can swap to Dawn, but no matter how much baking I do at home it's their bakery, expecting them to hold a vote for their customers is insane. It's kind enough of them to post the recipies on the wall for us, and give us free cakes. What the hell like?

[sudoer541]

my two cents... guys/gals, this is a free OS and you are not paying for it.
I think we should all respect the decisions they make cuz ubuntu is free and there is no DRM and all that crap that other OSes have. For those who dont like the decision that Mark takes... then there are 1000+ linux distros to chose from. Whats stopping you?
Once again, beggars cant be choosers.

[audiomick]

I think being the owner or the boss of a company constitutes being a dictator, and this is ok. If the boss then choses to run the company along democratic lines, all the better, and my impression is that Ubuntu is run more or less along those lines.

One should not forget that even in a perfect democracy, given that there is rarely a unanimous vote for anything, there will always be people whose vote "loses", i.e. the outcome will more or less please the majority, but never everyone.

Then there is "market research", which is, in a way, also a type of democracy. Ubuntu is gaining ground continuosly, as far as I can tell. Therefore, the creators must be paying attention to their market research. Therefore, the system has a democratic element.

Incidentally, please don't forget that the USA is not the only democracy in the world. I have noticed a number of posts in the thread that seem to assume that the word "democracy" automatically refers exclusively to the governmental system of the USA. There are also a couple of other countries in the world that have rather successful democratic governments...;)

[samh785]

true democracy doesn't work because most people are stupid and can only think of themselves or their own agenda rather than the big picture.

if every decision was open to the public vote there would never be anything done
http://www.soi.org/reading/goodpractice/morgan%20091202.pdf

Princeton University studies would say otherwise. :P

[Tristam Green]

If every decision that needs to be made for Ubuntu had to be made by consensus even one as Earth shattering as the default background or for the position of buttons then Ubuntu would like so many Distributions before wither and die.

If Linux is to move beyond the 1.5% it needs to grow beyond the comune mentality.

Decisions will be made having regard to the greater picture, that is a fact of life.

Kiwi, I agree with you here. However, my problem with this whole microdebacle isn't that the decision was made almost corporately, or that the deaf ear was turned to some loud inquest as to why it was done, or suggestions (which I was under the impression were *always* welcome) on how to allow users the option to change it back.

What really bothers me is Shuttleworth's blatant unprofessional tone in the bug report when he addresses those very users. Just as insulting users isn't welcome around here, I would think that a successful businessman would be able to keep himself from lashing out at his own userbase. Those very actions are what I saw in the Launchpad bug report commentary. It's shameful, and really tarnishes Shuttleworth's image, as well as that of Canonical and Ubuntu by extension.


can't disagree with anything there except i think all customers should be listened to regardless of what they contribute. maybe all someone does is complain, so their opinions obviously aren't going to rank too highly.
your posts about the worthlessness of non paying customers made me think you thought they should just be ignored all together.
of course there's an order of merit, the non paying, non contributing users shouldn't have as much say as someone else who's donating time and/or money, but the devs should still be listening to what they say, even if only to gauge public opinion.

I believe that the bolded is a component of the "freedom" that our more fervent users believe, or at least have us think they believe.

[mickie.kext]

I respect Mark S. even more when I saw how he responed on trollish posts on Launchpad.

[23meg]

What really bothers me is Shuttleworth's blatant unprofessional tone in the bug report when he addresses those very users. Just as insulting users isn't welcome around here, I would think that a successful businessman would be able to keep himself from lashing out at his own userbase. Those very actions are what I saw in the Launchpad bug report commentary. It's shameful, and really tarnishes Shuttleworth's image, as well as that of Canonical and Ubuntu by extension.

Could you quote the parts where he's "lashing out at his own userbase"?


I believe that the bolded is a component of the "freedom" that our more fervent users believe, or at least have us think they believe.

No, that freedom is in the software licenses, and nowhere else. It's very precisely worded, and for good reason. It does not grant anyone a right to be "listened to" any more or less than another. It has nothing whatsoever to do with governance.

[d3v1150m471c]

"The Ubuntu community has always been a meritocracy – a system whereby people are given responsibilities based upon proven talent and aptitude – so any gripes over this are about 5 years late. Ubuntu shines because it has the best people delegated to manage and oversee each part of it."

[Tristam Green]

Could you quote the parts where he's "lashing out at his own userbase"?

Telling a user that "There's a job waiting for you at a tabloid" (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/light-themes/+bug/532633/comments/180) is rude and unprofessional.

*edit* before you say "well, fewt asked for it, he was being unruly in his response to mark in the first place," I'll even grant you that. But here's the kicker: fewt doesn't represent Ubuntu or Canonical publicly. To Mark, fewt was just another disgruntled customer. However, Mark gave into Bug #1 of Customer Service: he let his emotions get the best of him when talking to a customer. That is unprofessional and makes him look very bad.

Do with it what you will. I already know what will be said though, so it doesn't matter that I quote it at all.


No, that freedom is in the software licenses, and nowhere else. It's very precisely worded, and for good reason. It does not grant anyone a right to be "listened to" any more or less than another. It has nothing whatsoever to do with governance.

Freedom is only free if it's the kind we say it is, then? Sounds like pure awesome from where I'm sitting.

[samh785]

In my opinion, this is a borderline non-issue. Ubuntu is very successful and IMO a very good distro. It's governance isn't open and was never intended to be. If you really have a problem with the direction it's heading, then I'll give you three possible courses of action that you can take that seem reasonable to me:


Make a fork
Switch to another existing distro (debian would be the best choice if you want something similar to Ubuntu)
Edit your installation of Ubuntu to fit your desires! (Linux is very customizable!)

[AllRadioisDead]

This shouldn't be an issue at all.

[23meg]

Telling a user that "There's a job waiting for you at a tabloid" (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/light-themes/+bug/532633/comments/180) is rude and unprofessional.

Do with it what you will. I already know what will be said though, so it doesn't matter that I quote it at all.

Thanks, I just wanted to learn what precisely you considered "lashing out at his userbase". I have no further questions.


Freedom is only free if it's the kind we say it is, then? Sounds like pure awesome from where I'm sitting.

Rather, arbitrarily extrapolating meanings of flexible words ("free") across distinct fields (software licensing and governance) results in weasel statements.

[doas777]

@tristam,
in all fairness, a more appropriate snippet of the source would be


@fewt
There's a job waiting for you at a tabloid, if that's how you treat
commentary. Isolating snippets and using them out of context is just rude.
thanks for the linkage

you are right, any form of organization will necessarily impose some practices, procedures, and protocols. this is the nature of project management. the three Ps are nothing new in OSS, so even if you consider it hypocritical to organize a free open source project, it is still the rule, not the exception.

IMO an os is too big a thing to be put together without some form of coordination. true you may not be able to directly influence ubuntu in an authoritative way, but you can fork it any which way you want, if you are willing to do the work.

[Tristam Green]

Well, my router bit the dust just prior to my typing a lengthy reply, so I have lost said reply and I don't feel like retyping it.

@doas777; please accept my apologies for my quote (or lack of completion thereof). it's late, and i am attempting to illustrate a point. a point that i feel won't be heeded at all, but i can only attempt.

@23meg; I don't quite understand your demeanor in this. I understand your stake in it, and I certainly appreciate the hard work you do with the Ubuntu project. We all do. It would be complete lunacy to say you guys don't work hard on the OS.

I've always felt that release dates are the ultimate market test. Need recent proofs? Look at the releases for Windows Vista, and for Windows 7. Comparatively distinct in every way, with Vista falling flat on its face in terms of enterprise adoption, versus the juggernaut of 7 in the same environment. Yes, I realize there was a lot more changed from Vista to 7 than just a UI, but the point is, Microsoft actually shifted policy and began listening to the everyday joes who have to live and work with this stuff.

Take what you will from my mini-tirade. I maintain that while Mark, the devs, and anyone associated with the Ubuntu project can be dismissive as they wish of anyone who doesn't sign a check for support in any fashion (technical or charitable), but the comments I saw were not of one well-versed in Customer Service. I'd be ashamed if I said "you do not get to second-guess the team" had I written software, and someone had a minor problem with button placement.

[23meg]

Take what you will from my mini-tirade. I maintain that while Mark, the devs, and anyone associated with the Ubuntu project can be dismissive as they wish of anyone who doesn't sign a check for support in any fashion (technical or charitable), but the comments I saw were not of one well-versed in Customer Service.

I don't agree that anyone formally associated with Ubuntu has the right to be dismissive of anyone in a public exchange regarding Ubuntu; if necessary, look up the CoC, and especially the Leadership CoC, which applies here. Yet, it may be that English is not my first language, but I honestly don't find "you don't get to second-guess the team" and the "tabloid" quote rude, in context.

If you care about what you perceive as unprofessionalism not detracting from Ubuntu's public image in similar situations to this in the future, it would be a good idea to provide context when referring to a conversation, rather than highlighting a single quote by one person.


I'd be ashamed if I said "you do not get to second-guess the team" had I written software, and someone had a minor problem with button placement.

I wouldn't either, but that's not the situation here. "You don't get to second-guess the team" wasn't a personal response to a particular person regarding window button placement. Again, context matters here, just like it mattered in the exchange in question.

[23meg]

On a more general note, I have the following to add.

It's true that Ubuntu being a meritocracy rather than a direct democracy is not news (http://www.ubuntu.com/community/processes/governance); and I find this "celebrity bug report" beneficial in that it has made this fact more widely known. If lots of people participated in Ubuntu without knowing this essential aspect of its governance, and this heated bug report conversation woke them up to it, all the better; regardless of what they do afterwards.

However, there's a problem in the way "merit" is placed in this particular discussion.

There are well known and extremely well organized community resources, processes and governance bodies for honing and proving your merit as a developer, documenter, QA practitioner or evangelist in Ubuntu. But this does not apply to user experience and design, which is the field concerned in this change. Canonical has a UX&D team, but there's no community counterpart of that team the way there are counterparts or extensions of other Canonical teams (Desktop, Server, QA, etc.) And there's no defined process for getting involved in that field, no resources, no council who decides who has "merit".

"Merit" is not a homogeneous resource that applies across fields. "If you don't like the decisions, get the merit to challenge them and then we'll talk" is a valid line overall, but it falls short in this particular example, due to the situation I outlined in the above paragraph. Your merit in kernel maintenance, documentation or forum moderation should not give you a louder voice in a UI design discussion (not that it does, but bear with me). And when you have no way to judge UI design merit, the concept of merit itself becomes questionable in the discussion.

But there's a flipside to all this: multiple people who are part of the UX&D team have confirmed (references: 1 (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=8985558&postcount=145), 2 (http://podcast.ubuntu-uk.org/2010/03/17/s03e03-behind-the-screen/), 3 (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-art/2010-March/011902.html); refer to the interview with Ivanka in 2) that they're aware that the current situation is problematic, and that they just haven't gotten round to fixing it yet. And I'm going to propose a roundtable at the next UDS in which to address it.

[Post Monkeh]

http://www.soi.org/reading/goodpractice/morgan%20091202.pdf

Princeton University studies would say otherwise. :P

disregarding the fact that sometimes intellectuals are the most stupid group of all when it comes to understanding anything to do with human nature, i was talking about if every single decision was put to the vote of an entire populace.

a small group by definition has its own agenda amongst that group.

once you open that up to hundreds of thousands of people, all you get is chaos. lots of people thinking of what's best for them, and very few people thinking of what's best for everyone as a whole.

[rottentree]

Shuttleworth just became more sympathetic to me it's quite nice that he actually comments on issues and responds to people even if his linked in post(by Tristam Green) would make a top hatted gentleman's monocle fall off I don't think there's anything bad with him not being stone-faced business man #456 when talking to his community.
(Now on first post)
What Shuttleworth says means sense you don't get to question the decision because you aren't among the best to make the decision if you were you would be among those who make the decision though being a bit more transparent certainly would have helped in easing the impact.
I think people can cope with a seemingly illogical change if they know that its for the future good and it is indeed logical with the bigger picture in mind.

[samh785]

disregarding the fact that sometimes intellectuals are the most stupid group of all when it comes to understanding anything to do with human nature, i was talking about if every single decision was put to the vote of an entire populace.

a small group by definition has its own agenda amongst that group.

once you open that up to hundreds of thousands of people, all you get is chaos. lots of people thinking of what's best for them, and very few people thinking of what's best for everyone as a whole.
Your opinion would have more merit if you could back it up with facts instead of conjecture.

[Post Monkeh]

Your opinion would have more merit if you could back it up with facts instead of conjecture.

maybe so, but since most democracies in the world agree with my belief that every citizen having a vote on every decision isn't the best way to do things, i'd find it hard to provide any catastrophic failings to back things up.

switzerland is a direct democracy, but even it has elected representatives to make the decisions rather than EVERY decision being put to the vote, the citizens just have an amount of power to veto anything they don't agree with.

when you get older you'l learn that theworld isn't perfect and people don't always look out for everyone else at the expense of themselves. "democracy" as we know it is more about protecting the rights of the minority than representing the views of the majority, because with "true" democracy, the biggest group get everything their own way, regardless of how that effects the smallest group, where at least with representative democracy, the small groups have their own representation in all decisions.
but this is straying into a political discussion, and has nothing at all to do with the original point, so i'll leave it at that.

[_h_]

What does politics have to do with Mark? :S

[sudoer541]

What does politics have to do with Mark? :S


dont know...

MODZZZZ!!!!! pls close this thread!!!

[KiwiNZ]

As this is drifting into general politics its time to close