Rafal 'Raf256' Maj wrote:
> Suggesting new futures.

And once you have made the suggestion and been told that it has already been 
considered, ten times before, twice a year, and rejected each and every 
time, how can you see a point in discussing it for the 11th time? - the 
answer is you don't, you don't care about that feature, you have other 
reasons for posting.  And those reasons are why you get the replies you are 
getting.  Contribute something of value, and there will be no problem.

> I do not understand why core developer(s) are now 
> so un willing for new "cool" stuff. 

As previously stated elsewhere to someone else in this thread, your 
"observation" is simply incorrect and most likely caused by a simple lack of 
understanding.  The obvious course of action is not to participate in a 
discussion whose topic you don't understand.  If you look back, you will 
notice you (and a few others) have provided no useful input in this 
discussion at all.  You have been on this server long enough to know which 
topics you don't understand and should really avoid adding unnecessary noise 
to such discussions.

	Thorsten

Post a reply to this message

Rafal 'Raf256' Maj wrote:
> war### [at] tagpovrayorg news:420de332@news.povray.org
> 
> 
>>  You are talking about a more elaborated SDL scripting language
>>  (which is 
>>exactly what has been planned for pov4), not a plugin engine.
>>  In other words, you are in the right track.
>>
> 
> 
> Yeay \o/
> 
> So, where are discussions bout that new SDL/shading language?
> 
ROFLMFAO

Post a reply to this message

Rafal 'Raf256' Maj wrote:
>>  You are talking about a more elaborated SDL scripting language
>>  (which is 
>>exactly what has been planned for pov4), not a plugin engine.
>>  In other words, you are in the right track.
> 
> So, where are discussions bout that new SDL/shading language?

You really should have grasped by now, after having been on this server for 
a long time, that discussions of POV-Ray development are not public.  *You* 
are part of that public and consequently there are private discussions you 
*cannot* see.  Yet, the inability to see something does not imply it does 
not exist - this is not at all different from anything else happening 
everywhere else.  I am not certain why you pretend to not being able to be 
able to assume such a simple fact and ask to such a question instead.

Either way, the honest reason why such discussions are private is really 
simple: It is people like you, Darren New and a few others who would just 
contribute so much noise to certain public discussions for whatever reason, 
it would be a total waste of time for anybody else involved.  Hence, all 
POV-Ray development discussions will remain private and provide an ongoing 
successful development of POV-Ray for everyone to enjoy and not for a few to 
destroy.

	Thorsten

Post a reply to this message

tho### [at] trfde news:42113cb4$1@news.povray.org

> Either way, the honest reason why such discussions are private is
> really simple: It is people like you, Darren New and a few others who
> would just contribute so much noise to certain public discussions for
> whatever reason, it would be a total waste of time for anybody else
> involved.  Hence, all POV-Ray development discussions will remain
> private and provide an ongoing successful development of POV-Ray for
> everyone to enjoy and not for a few to destroy.

And this is why Closed Source (as in "closed discussino, closed wish lists, 
closed bugzilla archives) is usually beter then opensource.

-- 
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> except to repeatedly say STFU.

Given that you have now spammed this thread with 1/4 of its total messages, 
that seems to be a lost cause :-(

	Thorsten

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> 
>> for a long time, that discussions of POV-Ray development are not public.
> 
> Then you should probably change the official FAQ to not say that such 
> discussions belong on povray.general.

As it is certainly not said anywhere there that official POV-Ray development 
is discussed in povray.general, I can only conclude you are suffering from 
serious delusions and need urgent medical attention.

	Thorsten

Post a reply to this message

<sigh>

I just fail to understand why you don't use the 'K' key in your setup
(assuming thunderbird is the same on the Mac as it is on other platforms,
'K' is the "ignore thread" option).  You find the entire discussion
pointless and useless, so why *do* you bother reading it?  All your
comments do is distract from the actual discussion, which while you may
think is pointless, there are some people who are actually interested in
the ideas.  Maybe they won't ever be implemented in POV-Ray - but what
does that really matter?  The nature of research is that many ideas are
looked at - many of them are looked at multiple times - and sometimes you
get a gem.  Most of the time you don't, but every once in a while, it does.

Quashing discussion just because you don't see the value, or because you
believe there is no value does nothing to encourage people to think and
consider that they might actually have something to contribute of value. 
You want people to contribute things that are of value, right?  Well, if I
read this discussion and think "Man, there's no way that I might
contribute something that ______ would consider valuable, so why should
I even suggest my idea", and then the idea is lost.  And who knows, maybe
it would be an idea on how to optimize the raytracing algorithms, or to
modify the radiosity routines in a way that perhaps would cut render times
in half?

I find a couple of things perhaps somewhat amusing here:

1.  You don't seem to be able to ignore threads you see no value in, and

2.  You seem to just want to argue for the sake of arguing.

*I* understand what you're saying - not that you said anything to help me
understand what you were saying, mind - but that doesn't mean (a) that
those who think there is value in discussing it should not be allowed to
do so, and (b) that you certainly have no obligation to contribute to
those discussions.

In fact, I found it somewhat amusing that in this thread you've gone on
and on about the lack of portability, yet in another recent thread about
launching POV-Ray in a cross-platform environment, you indicated that
cross-platform support wasn't important to you personally.  In my own
mind, I have to wonder "which is it?  Is x-plat important to this guy or
not?".  The only conclusion I can come to is that you, like many others I
know in this field who have a high opinion of themselves (and in many
cases, *rightly so*) just like to disagree with everyone for the sake of
disagreeing.

As I've said *repeatedly*, I have nothing but respect for the members of
the POV-Ray team; I've personally known past members of the team and had
some very interesting discussions where I learned a lot - and I have to
say that I learned a lot not because Dan Farmer said to me "You're an
idiot and don't know what you're talking about" but took the time to
explain something to me that I didn't understand, even though it was
probably the 300th time he had explained it to someone.  And yes, those
discussions were had a bit before you got your driver's license.

That's the nature of online support, my friend.  I've been doing online
support for nearly 15 years now, and the nature of it is that you *will*
have the same discussions over and over and over again, ad nauseum.  That
is virtually *guaranteed*, and there is absolutely *nothing* you can do
about it.  Yelling at people doesn't work.  Just let them bash it out in
their own time - sometimes, people have to learn things for themselves,
they have to make the mistakes that have already been made to have an
epiphany.  Many people learn by *doing*, not by being told.  So let 'em.

Who knows, maybe the 15th time, someone will have an idea that nobody on
the POV-Ray team has thought of.  I'm sure you'll be skeptical of that
statement/idea, though.  You only want discussions that - how did you put
it - "Contribute something of value".  But of course nobody but you knows
what you consider valuable, so the only way to find it is to be subjected
to your anger and frustration.  Quite frankly, that's a great way to drive
users away from the POV-Ray project (again, BTDTGTTS).

As a long-time user of the software, I really appreciate the work that the
team has done to turn out a piece of software that truly is world-class. 
It's a shame that there are those who would rather not have open
discussion about things relating to the software, regardless of the value
they perceive in the discussions.  I would think that the POV-Ray team
would see that there is value in the process, regardless of the value the
team perceives to the outcome (or the projected outcome).

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> pointless and useless, so why *do* you bother reading it?

The problem is once started, there are a few people here who will just add 
incorrect facts to it as the last posts.  in the past this came back to bite 
us.  And of courses, i never intended to have such a long discussion.

> comments do is distract from the actual discussion, which while you may
> think is pointless, there are some people who are actually interested in
> the ideas.  Maybe they won't ever be implemented in POV-Ray - but what
> does that really matter? 

As this server is for discussion of POV-Ray, yes.  Probably this whole 
discussion should have moved to p.off-topic a long time ago..

> Quashing discussion just because you don't see the value, or because you
> believe there is no value does nothing to encourage people to think and
> consider that they might actually have something to contribute of value. 

There is a difference between various POV-Team members not seeing any value 
in it and repeating a discussion for the 11th time.

> You want people to contribute things that are of value, right?  Well, if I
> read this discussion and think "Man, there's no way that I might
> contribute something that ______ would consider valuable, so why should
> I even suggest my idea", and then the idea is lost.

This group would be the wrong place for such discussion!  There is a huge 
difference between making a suggestion and being told that it has been 
rejected and just letting it go, or to continue arguing that all the 
developers of POV-Ray are obviously so stupid or uninterested in the 
development of POV-Ray that they just don't want to implement it (which 
some, not you, have done).

> 1.  You don't seem to be able to ignore threads you see no value in, and

Actually, I already ignore 99%+ of the threads on this server.

> 2.  You seem to just want to argue for the sake of arguing.

Certainly not.  I have no need to argue with certain people because I know 
it is a waste of time.  However, I do have a problem when those people who 
make outright false or defamatory remarks about POV-Ray development or 
developers on this server.

> In fact, I found it somewhat amusing that in this thread you've gone on
> and on about the lack of portability, yet in another recent thread about
> launching POV-Ray in a cross-platform environment, you indicated that
> cross-platform support wasn't important to you personally. 

Apparently you are confusing me with someone else.

> say that I learned a lot not because Dan Farmer said to me "You're an
> idiot and don't know what you're talking about" but took the time to
> explain something to me that I didn't understand, even though it was
> probably the 300th time he had explained it to someone. 

Actually, back then there were far fewer people online and those who were 
online were almost all less "demanding" when it comes to what they expect 
from something they get for free.  Not to mention, a certain level of 
computer talent was needed to get online.  Today even for a free offer you 
get plenty of flames for truly random reasons or no reason at all from 
people who ten years ago could not have managed to get online even if they 
wanted to.

> And yes, those
> discussions were had a bit before you got your driver's license.

Which reminds me I should update my website, that picture is really old 
now... ;-)

> That's the nature of online support, my friend.  I've been doing online
> support for nearly 15 years now, and the nature of it is that you *will*
> have the same discussions over and over and over again, ad nauseum.  That
> is virtually *guaranteed*, and there is absolutely *nothing* you can do
> about it. 

Oh, hence I posted the link to an old discussion.  Interesting enough, 
absolutely nothing new came up in this one, but plenty was repeated from the 
last ones.  Obviously it is fine to discuss the same thing again and waste 
resources for that, but it is not necessary to read the old discussion. 
Personally I think such attitude is unacceptable.

> Yelling at people doesn't work.  Just let them bash it out in
> their own time - sometimes, people have to learn things for themselves,
> they have to make the mistakes that have already been made to have an
> epiphany.  Many people learn by *doing*, not by being told.  So let 'em.

A certain group of people her does not do that, unfortunately :-(

> Who knows, maybe the 15th time, someone will have an idea that nobody on
> the POV-Ray team has thought of.  I'm sure you'll be skeptical of that
> statement/idea, though.  You only want discussions that - how did you put
> it - "Contribute something of value".  But of course nobody but you knows
> what you consider valuable, so the only way to find it is to be subjected
> to your anger and frustration.  Quite frankly, that's a great way to drive
> users away from the POV-Ray project (again, BTDTGTTS).

As repeated numerous times now, and not only by me, there is exactly no 
interested in plug-ins, even if discussed a 20th time.  If that i the only 
suggestion people have that would be really sad.

> It's a shame that there are those who would rather not have open
> discussion about things relating to the software, regardless of the value
> they perceive in the discussions.

Again, you are completely missing the difference between repeating a 
discussion and discussing a new idea.  New ideas are really welcome!!!

Yet, that requires first getting an idea if something was not already 
suggested before.  Like in real-life, you would not walk into a meeting and 
repeat the ideas of last year.  All you would be told is to read memo xyz 
and if you would not do so and come again with the same idea the next week 
and the week after that, eventually you would have a hard time not being 
perceived as a total joke by your coworkers, friends or whoever you are 
meeting with.  Yet, for some strange reason a behavior that is considered 
totally inappropriate in real-life seems to be expected to be accepted by 
everybody when a small minority insists on it.

	Thorsten

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> 
>> As it is certainly not said anywhere there that official POV-Ray 
>> development is discussed in povray.general, I can only conclude you 
>> are suffering from serious delusions and need urgent medical attention.
> 
> 
> http://tag.povray.org/povQandT/miscQandT.html#suggestingideas
> 
> Now, is it me, or does that actually say
> 
>   "I would like to suggest some new features for the program.
>    Who should I talk to?"
> 
>    This is best discussed on the POV-Ray news groups
>    (news.povray.org) in both the general news group
> 
> as described by our own illustrious Warp. :-)

So that says the POV-Ray development is discussed in povray.general??? Sure...

	Thorsten

Post a reply to this message

"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in message
news:421143d5$1@news.povray.org...
> Darren New wrote:
> > except to repeatedly say STFU.
>
> Given that you have now spammed this thread with 1/4 of its total messages,
> that seems to be a lost cause :-(

And you've posted about 70% the number of messages he has.  Most of his posts
wouldn't have been made if it weren't for you replying saying the thread was
pointless.

The conversation has become, for the most part, a little trolling match between
the two of you - it's no wonder what these threads don't get anywhere.

You want posts to contribute something, well perhaps it's time you started
leading by example.  Stop feeding the trolls and get back to the actual topic,
and if you think the actual topic is pointless, don't reply - your time is
valuable and you shouldn't waste it on things you consider pointless.

Lance.

thezone - thezone.firewave.com.au
thehandle - www.thehandle.com

Post a reply to this message