To the authors: Please try to bit a more consistent

OpenGL
21

I was pretty much done with this thread (due to, well, see all of the above), but I found this interesting enough to comment on it:

As I’ve said a couple of times now, and will not repeat, the issue is subjective and therefore not suitable for being discussed of being right or wrong. And as long as you fail to understand that, your debate will just turn in circles.

Let’s ignore whether or not your claims are in fact “subjective”. Let’s just take it on faith and agree with you that your claim is subjective.

If your subjective claim is “not suitable for being discussed of being right or wrong”, why did you bring it to a discussion forum? You’re saying that you can write what you want to write, but nobody can ever claim that what you’re writing is wrong. If that’s true, there can be no discussion.

If you put ideas on a discussion forum, people are going think that you want those ideas to be discussed. I know we’re kinda crazy to think that discussions should happen on a discussion forum. But that’s just how we do things around here.

If a “subjective” claim is not suitable for discussion, then you shouldn’t post subjective claims on a discussion forum. Therefore, either you have chosen the wrong medium for your claims, or subjective posts are indeed viable targets for discussion.

Now, let me head off your attempted counter-argument. You’re going to claim that there’s a difference between “discussion” in general and “discussed of being right or wrong”. That people can discuss your post, but they can’t say whether you’re right or wrong.

Well, if nobody can claim that your comment is right or wrong… what is there to discuss at all? Nobody can agree with you, since that’s claiming that you’re right. Nobody can disagree for similar reasons. Nobody can add anything to your point, as that implicit agrees with your point (ie: I agree with part of it plus this). Nobody can subtract anything from your point, as that implicitly disagrees with some part of your position. And nobody can suggest modifications to it. It’s just you, posting what you want, with nobody saying anything afterwards.

That’s not a discussion; that’s a blog.

So if you don’t want people to agree or disagree with your position or your arguments, go get a blog already. If you want actual discussion, then you can’t decide that discussion is inappropriate.

And I find it interesting and convenient that this notion of “this post is subjective, so you can’t say anything for or against it” only showed up after your argument was met with… shall we say, resistance. Why do I suspect that you would never have claimed that your post was “not suitable for being discussed of being right or wrong” if I had agreed wholeheartedly with your complaint, rather than vivisecting and pureeing it?

You don’t get to change the rules of the game in the middle of it just because you’re losing.

So if we’re not to agree or disagree, what are we to discuss about your complaint? What’s left to talk about, besides you just posting a rant?

Why are vague complaints which are supposed to provoke - even if just a little - reconsideration not worth paying attention to?

It wastes everyone’s time except yours. You’re basically saying that the ARB should take the time to find out where all of these issues are and correct them, but you’re not going to bother telling them where. You’re saying that your time is more valuable than theirs. That they should just take the word of a random guy on an Internet forum and spend man-days worth of time overhauling the specification.

All to meet some needs that this random guy on an Internet forum didn’t even bother to take the time to clearly explain. Your complaint is so vague that the only way the ARB would even know if they had corrected the problem to your satisfaction is to ask you personally.

And that’s patently absurd. At the very least, any legitimate complaint or proposal should contain enough information for the ARB to know if they had successfully achieved that goal.

Yours doesn’t, because (as you are so fond of pointing out), it is purely “subjective”. It is impossible for the “not you” demographic to know if any particular corrective action they take actually fixes the problem. Because you are the only one who knows the size, scope and nature of the problem. Therefore, your complaint is utterly useless for actually fixing said problem.

The only way your complaint could be useful is if it landed you a job as editor for the specification. And somehow, I don’t see that happening.

If you can’t be considerate enough of the ARB’s time to actually outline specific issues, rather than just offering vague conjecture, then why should the ARB be considerate in giving your vague conjecture consideration? You get the respect you show.

22

I’m actually delighted by your comment. Opposed to other people whose name I don’t need to mention, you’re absolutely capable of formulating clear, coherent counter arguments. Refreshingly, they are so obviously wrong that I can most readily refute them one by one.

Let’s ignore whether or not your claims are in fact “subjective”. Let’s just take it on faith and agree with you that your claim is subjective.

If your subjective claim is “not suitable for being discussed of being right or wrong”, why did you bring it to a discussion forum?

…also, I love how you formulate real questions…

You’re saying that you can write what you want to write, but nobody can ever claim that what you’re writing is wrong. If that’s true, there can be no discussion.

If you put ideas on a discussion forum, people are going think that you want those ideas to be discussed. I know we’re kinda crazy to think that discussions should happen on a discussion forum. But that’s just how we do things around here.

If a “subjective” claim is not suitable for discussion, then you shouldn’t post subjective claims on a discussion forum. Therefore, either you have chosen the wrong medium for your claims, or subjective posts are indeed viable targets for discussion.

Now, let me head off your attempted counter-argument.

Let me cut in right here, because what you’re anticipating turns out to be wrong. Actually, I’ve already given my response to that question, but I repeat: The subject is not open for discussion regarding whether what I say is right or wrong because I’m necessarily right saying that I find the specification unclear. The subject is not open for discussion because no one can possibly disprove that I’m not suitably experienced and well-versed in working with technical specifications and spotting problems therein, as little as I can prove that I do. The subject may be open to discussion in terms of specific examples which one may or may not find confusing, which, however, I will not have part in, as I made amply clear - because I reckon with endless debates which I’m not overly enthusiastic about.

So, why a “discussion forum”?

Bluntly put: I can relate to you saying that this is more of a blog entry and that I should publish it on a blog. I just don’t. Deal with it.

And I’m outspokenly of the opinion that I don’t have to. A discussion forum is equally meant for factual debate as it is for opinions. Funnily enough, many people who submit to forums on a regular basis do the exact opposite: They elevate their personal opinions to undeniable facts. And given the clientele of their very kin, that often leads to long, heated arguments which often end with one insulting the other.
I don’t do that. I make it clear from the beginning that what I have to say is an opinion. The subject is an opinion. There is no discussion to be led. That may be what upsets you. That the subject doesn’t meet your expectations for it doesn’t lend itsself to a rough debate. No less, I put it into a “discussion forum”.

You’re going to claim that there’s a difference between “discussion” in general and “discussed of being right or wrong”. That people can discuss your post, but they can’t say whether you’re right or wrong.

Well, if nobody can claim that your comment is right or wrong… what is there to discuss at all? Nobody can agree with you, since that’s claiming that you’re right. Nobody can disagree for similar reasons. Nobody can add anything to your point, as that implicit agrees with your point (ie: I agree with part of it plus this). Nobody can subtract anything from your point, as that implicitly disagrees with some part of your position. And nobody can suggest modifications to it. It’s just you, posting what you want, with nobody saying anything afterwards.

People can share their opinions on the matter. Period.

That’s not a discussion; that’s a blog.

So if you don’t want people to agree or disagree with your position or your arguments, go get a blog already. If you want actual discussion, then you can’t decide that discussion is inappropriate.

And I find it interesting and convenient that this notion of “this post is subjective, so you can’t say anything for or against it” only showed up after your argument was met with… shall we say, resistance. Why do I suspect that you would never have claimed that your post was “not suitable for being discussed of being right or wrong” if I had agreed wholeheartedly with your complaint, rather than vivisecting and pureeing it?

Interesting question, at last. I honestly don’t know.

You don’t get to change the rules of the game in the middle of it just because you’re losing.

And then you’re wrong again. I don’t make any attempt to change them. I’m reminding you of them. You just happen not to like them.

So if we’re not to agree or disagree, what are we to discuss about your complaint? What’s left to talk about, besides you just posting a rant?

It wastes everyone’s time except yours. You’re basically saying that the ARB should take the time to find out where all of these issues are and correct them, but you’re not going to bother telling them where. You’re saying that your time is more valuable than theirs. That they should just take the word of a random guy on an Internet forum and spend man-days worth of time overhauling the specification.

I’m perplexed by your sudden portayal of absolute ignorance. I’ve said multiple times - for one in the third sentence of my introductory comment - that I don’t demand anything nor expect anyone to do anything for me but only want to share my opinion.

All to meet some needs that this random guy on an Internet forum didn’t even bother to take the time to clearly explain.

Your claims are becoming more and more ridiculous as we go. If you’re not completely thick - which I think you aren’t - you must be aware of how much time I’ve spent on this thread going through your responses and even elaborating a few examples, which I have never intended for. Examples, mind you, which even you turned out to partially agree with.

Your complaint is so vague that the only way the ARB would even know if they had corrected the problem to your satisfaction is to ask you personally.

And that’s patently absurd. At the very least, any legitimate complaint or proposal should contain enough information for the ARB to know if they had successfully achieved that goal.

And another round… Round 'n round in circles, aren’t we? No, there is nothing absurd about sharing a vague opinion. If you can relate to it, that’s great. If you can’t, move on. Perhaps you don’t realize it, but you, as has the other guy, have been staging this discussion which I, so I shamefully admit, have enjoyed a little bit, for no good at all. Back in the past, when you read the opening post, there were two paths layed out for you:

The “I don’t get what’s his problem”-and-move-on-path and the “I have an opinion on that, too”-and-share-it-path. But instead of choosing one, you run right out in the sticks with your “You’re talking bloody nonsense”-machete.

The only way your complaint could be useful is if it landed you a job as editor for the specification. And somehow, I don’t see that happening.

Oh, I guess that’s that for the purpose of my thread, then…

23

purpose of your thread is most likely pointless argument rolling. because you completely deny consecutive logic, making absurd, arrogant statements just for the sake of further argument. last alfonse’s post is exactly what any sensible person thinks seeing this topic. i thought the same, but was too lazy to write such walls of text to spoon-feed a person who’s either trolling or seriously deluded.

24

I can relate to you saying that this is more of a blog entry and that I should publish it on a blog. I just don’t. Deal with it.

Then you need to deal with the fact that this is a discussion forum. Discussion opinions is perfectly valid here.

Furthermore, you seem to be one of those people who believes that opinions are things that can’t be right or wrong. That if you claim something is an opinion, then you don’t have to defend it. That’s wrong.

Here’s an example. Let’s say I take my car to a mechanic. He says that the problem is with the transmission. I think the problem is with the radiator. Who’s right? Well, they’re both our opinions, so by your logic, nobody’s right.

However, the mechanic could, if he were so inclined, walk me through the details of the functioning of a car and explain exactly how the problem comes from the transmission. He would be able to provide evidence of his opinion, thereby justifying it. Because my knowledge of cars is limited to making them go from point A to point B, I would not. Therefore, his opinion is valid, while mine is uninformed speculation based solely on my arrogant belief that I somehow know more about something on this subject than an expert.

It doesn’t matter what you believe; what matters is why you believe it. If you can’t defend you opinion by anything other than “it’s my opinion”, then it is worth nothing to the “not you” demographic of the world. Oh, you can still believe it, but don’t expect anyone else to be convinced.

Your opinion is wrong because you have failed to defend it (or really, to state it clearly enough to be defended). There are other opinions people have brought up on this forum that haven’t held water, either due to general ignorance of what they’re talking about or whatever.

The rules of a discussion forum are that we discuss things; the OP does not get to rescind these rules. You posted your opinion on a discussion forum. Discussion happened. Deal with it.

I’m perplexed by your sudden portayal of absolute ignorance. I’ve said multiple times - for one in the third sentence of my introductory comment - that I don’t demand anything nor expect anyone to do anything for me but only want to share my opinion.

:doh:

My “absolute ignorance” was based on the assumption that you hoped that someone in power would read what you posted and then attempt to do something based on that. So not only do you not want discussion, you don’t even want the ARB to fix the problem you believe exists?

… what good is sharing an opinion if you don’t want anything to happen because of it?

And if you do want them to fix it (“demand”, “expect”, and “want” are three separate things), why did you not include sufficiently specific information that would allow them to fix it without having to talk to you directly?

I keep thinking back to one of your very first posts, your statement about being “welcomed with quite a lot of ignorance on the subject of ‘questioning the API’ on the OpenGL IRC channels”. I wonder why…

25

[QUOTE=Alfonse Reinheart;1249812]Then you need to deal with the fact that this is a discussion forum. Discussion opinions is perfectly valid here.

Furthermore, you seem to be one of those people who believes that opinions are things that can’t be right or wrong. That if you claim something is an opinion, then you don’t have to defend it. That’s wrong.

Here’s an example. Let’s say I take my car to a mechanic. He says that the problem is with the transmission. I think the problem is with the radiator. Who’s right? Well, they’re both our opinions, so by your logic, nobody’s right.

However, the mechanic could, if he were so inclined, walk me through the details of the functioning of a car and explain exactly how the problem comes from the transmission. He would be able to provide evidence of his opinion, thereby justifying it. Because my knowledge of cars is limited to making them go from point A to point B, I would not. Therefore, his opinion is valid, while mine is uninformed speculation based solely on my arrogant belief that I somehow know more about something on this subject than an expert.[/QUOTE]

Please put a bit more thought into your statements. Obviously, this is not the same, you’re just calling it that. “Opinion” and “speculation” are not the same thing. Let’s say I take my wife to a surgeon. He says there is nothing wrong with her and we should go home. I think, she is god-damn ugly and needs a facelift. Who’s right? According to your logic, we should discuss it and reach a definite outcome which nobody can’t possibly disagree with.

It doesn’t matter what you believe; what matters is why you believe it. If you can’t defend you opinion by anything other than “it’s my opinion”, then it is worth nothing to the “not you” demographic of the world. Oh, you can still believe it, but don’t expect anyone else to be convinced.

For the tenth time already, I don’t expect anyone to be convinced. Take it or leave it. You’re problem is that because you can’t relate to my opinion, you falsely assume that it holds no worth, globally. Get off your high horse. Perhaps you’d understand this better, if I illustrate it: In principle, I’d have been entitled to shorten a complaint to “I am an experienced reader of technical documents. I find the specification lacking clarity. Please think about it”. Although that likely wouldn’t have accomplished anything, it would have been a perfectly valid opinion.

Instead, I elaborated my criticism over multiple pages which you just happen to find unclear. Spot the resemblance? The irony, perhaps? The difference between you and me is only that you actually possess the pride to claim I’m ultimately wrong and unjustified whereas I just describe things from my perspective, merely claiming that my perspective matters for the specification.

Your opinion is wrong because you have failed to defend it (or really, to state it clearly enough to be defended). There are other opinions people have brought up on this forum that haven’t held water, either due to general ignorance of what they’re talking about or whatever.

The rules of a discussion forum are that we discuss things; the OP does not get to rescind these rules. You posted your opinion on a discussion forum. Discussion happened. Deal with it.

I do. I’m discussing it. I’m not ignoring you yet, am I? I just refuse to particate in lengthy and eventually pointless debates over subjective issues and rather contribute to this meta-debate.

My “absolute ignorance” was based on the assumption that you hoped that someone in power would read what you posted and then attempt to do something based on that. So not only do you not want discussion, you don’t even want the ARB to fix the problem you believe exists?

If you want your arguments to be taken seriously, you shouldn’t attempt to rely on the convenience that the forum removes double-quotes so you can suddenly change your meaning unnoticed:

You’re basically saying that the ARB should take the time to find out where all of these issues are and correct them, but you’re not going to bother telling them where. You’re saying that your time is more valuable than theirs. That they should just take the word of a random guy on an Internet forum and spend man-days worth of time overhauling the specification.

I find myself repeating the same things over and over again. You’ve proven to be capable of mature debate without resorting to personal attacks or general stupidity, a rare thing on the internet, but the quality of your responses (correlating with the uses of smilies, unprofound implications, and grabbing assumptions about what is “valid” and what’s “invalid” from thin air) is continuously decreasing. I don’t know what else I can add.
We do appear to have fundamental discord over whether I’m in fact allowed to just share an entirely subjective opinion (such as “I find this unclear”) and expect that very opinion of mine not to be challanged. I claim I do. You claim I don’t.

Bottom line: Continuing this meta-debate will not yield any further insights. And as for the topical debate, I claim there exists none and thus refuse to have part in any attempt to stage one. You know that I think the specification is widely unclear. You may believe that I’ve got plenty of experience in the field. You’re free to compare GL to others, such as the XML- or the C+±specification and even draw your own conclusions. I will not justify why I think the specification is unclear. No more, at least, than I already have. You will have to accept that.

Thanks for the civil debate. Have a good day.

26

Ok, here I am somewhat late to the barbeque. Skimmed a lot of this thread. My reactions:

I can understand wanting to avoid “having a tango” with Alfonse. Even if he’s partially right, it can be a big waste of time. But as others point out, he also does good work around here. Volunteer energy is a scarce commodity so I appreciate it when it actually exists, even if it comes in a “rough form” at times. Hey, I’ve been the rough / irritating guy in some other communities, but I also get things done. The energy to actually get stuff done, often goes hand in hand with being abrasive. Putting the best diplomat / best communication face on costs money, $XXX/hour. :slight_smile:

Having said that: ManDay, it doesn’t sound like you’ve posted to get a result. It sounds like you’ve posted to complain. Alfonse suggested one method of getting real world results: file bug reports. You pointed out some problems with that, the sheer quantity and general pattern of the problem. Now… frankly you may need to talk directly to Khronos people to have any real world effect or influence. In the time I’ve been hanging out on opengl.org, maybe a few years now, I’m not under the impression that this is any kind of direct communication channel with people who actually get things done. I’m not sure what is the channel, actually. But it’s not here, and it’s definitely not arguing with Alfonse.

If you really care about your issue, you would do well to research the best possible points of contact, and make inroads with those people. You will probably have to phrase your issue differently, rather than complaining. You’ll probably have to identify some specific cases you have problem with, really spell them out, to illustrate the general picture. You might have difficulty getting people to care, although then again, you might find someone within Khronos who actually agrees with you and is looking for ammo for their own crusade. I don’t know; I have no idea.

If this “people interfacing” stuff sounds like work, well yes, it is. The rest of us file bug reports. Even doing that gets to be a chore, which is why some things slide.

What are your expectations? People hanging around here aren’t the documentation committee. You’re going to have to talk directly to whomever those people are, if you really want to have an impact.

Personally, I wish Khronos ran more like an open source project. I feel instead that OpenGL is a company-to-company project with the “open” community pretty much a sideshow.