I am not an aggressor

[Wuzzy]

OK, I feel like things are getting a little out of hand on GitHub, and I am being accused, so I have to write this here …

Gymnasiast, you keep telling me in GitHub I'm being “aggressive” and “hostile” but I don't understand. No, really.
Even worse, you said that I'm being “aggressive” in every single issue. Wait, what?

It seems all do is just disagreeing. And I feel that my words are being interpreted in the worst possible light. People read bad intentions into my words, things that I have never said …
Look, I'm not your enemy. If I would be hostile towards OpenRCT2, I wouldn't have given you translations and other PRs, for starters.
I am a big fan of the OpenRCT2 project, after all, and I really like that the old RCT games are being “resurrected”.

I want to make OpenRCT2 better. And this includes talking about things that I think are currently bad. Sometimes there will be disagreements, about how to proceed that's true. So what?

I just want to say that OpenRCT2 is the only community so far in which I was told I'm being “hostile” and “aggressive”, and I have participated in quite some communities over the years …
Also please notice I never attacked anyone personally, I only “attacked” (criticized) OpenRCT2. Huge difference!

I don't like how the discussion about one particular feature (scenario unlocking checkbox) has been essentially shut down (twice!). Admittedly it's only a small feature (one of many), but it's something that always bugs me. But I already explained all of that in great detail.

I think closing and locking that issue was too early. Especially since even the author of the feature agreed the feature is not ideal and could be improved. Sounds like my criticisms did have some validity after all.

The only reason I called for removal was because my earlier suggestion (4 years ago) to change this feature has been rejected. I think it's a mistake to close and lock an issue when people actually agree that the criticism is at least partially correct (including from the very author of the feature in question, mind you!).

Yes, I know that removal is kind of the nuclear option. I'm actually OK if you don't want to remove it, no bad feelings. Yes, this step really was extreme. But I wasn't able to say this anymore since … the issue is locked. xD

Anyway, my opinion (!) stands that I don't like how the feature currently works. Yes, it's "only" an opinion, but one that I have justified before. Saying this opinion is not an act of aggression, it's just saying my opinion. What was I supposed to do? Nothing?

Anyway, the better solution might IMO be to actually improve the usability of this, rather than removal, but sadly, discussion on this aspect was shut down as well.

I also have to say this: all of your issues are written in a quite aggressive tone. This is starting to get on our nerves now. There is no need to act like this. I already warned you about this once.

I will admit that what you did here is not quite as bad as it used to be, but you will still need to work on how you discuss things. We want civil discourse, not fights. You will find that's we're more likely to listen if you ask things, rather than confidently stating that "the way x works is wrong".

First, I think it's a great exaggeration to say that ALL my issues are aggressive. This is completely false. Many issues just state bugs without even the slightest hint of an opinion, let alone aggression …

Look: When I say that something is “wrong” I always say *why* I think that way. I don't say things like that in a vacuum. If merely saying that I think that feature XYZ is “wrong” (with reasons) is already interpreted as an act of aggression, then sorry, I don't know if I or anybody else can actually criticize anything. It makes a huge difference if someone just trolls around or give honest criticism. I'm not a troll. I never intended to start a fight. I don't even know how I was supposed to post this issue differently, tbh. Saying that I think (!) that feature XYZ is bad (and why!) is kind of the core of the whole thing, after all.

I hope we can sort these things out without escalating further.

[jensj12]

The reason for locking the issue is a combination of two:

Quote

Now, since it seems there is little appetite for your idea and the discussion isn't very pleasant in the first place, I will close this.

Multiple developers agreed that the scenario unlocking feature will not be removed, the issue could therefore be closed. Since the discussion was slightly heated (or at least perceived as such) and there’s no point in discussing something that won’t be changed in the proposed way if there is a chance that it will escalate.

23 hours ago, Wuzzy said:

I don't even know how I was supposed to post this issue differently, tbh.

There was nothing wrong with the reasoning, but the wording could be a bit better. Here are some suggestions:

Quote

I doubt anyone would miss it.

Never assume someone else’s opinion, as that may be a personal attack to some. Simply remove this sentence.

Quote

Why? Because I think this...

Change this to ‘I think this...’. While answering questions others may have is fine, doing that implicitly may be a bit more polite. Also don’t write words in all caps, as that looks very very VERY much like you’re screaming, which is (usually) aggressive.

[Wuzzy]

OK, I agree it is dumb to assume the opinion of others. But that's not exactly what I did. Doubt is not belief. Anyway, you convinced me the sentence is useless.
No all-caps ever: This is perhaps a bit over the top. Writing an entire post in ALL-CAPS: OK, I agree. But only a single word? Come on!

Still I think it was an overreaction overall …

I agree with the reasoning for closing tho. No problem. Just not for locking. But whatever. This thread is more about myself. Especially the claim about me being aggressive in all issues is complete nonsense. This “triggered” me. :P

Edited July 20, 2020 by Wuzzy