DConf 2019: Shepherd's Pie Edition

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On 12/24/18 2:44 AM, Joakim wrote:
> On Sunday, 23 December 2018 at 22:36:05 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>
>> Huh? It's their decision, not yours. Even if the decision has no 
>> reason at all, it's still theirs. What is the problem? Start your own 
>> D "conference competitor" if you think you can do better.
> 
> They are accountable to the community, so the decision and its reasons 
> matter.

My impression is that the community likes and benefits from these 
conferences, so everything's cool there.

> I, for one, will not be donating to the foundation as long as 
> they continue to waste money this way, just as others have said they 
> won't donate as long as it doesn't put out a Vision document anymore or 
> otherwise communicate what it's doing with their money.

Nobody is asking for your money for this conference (unless you want to 
attend), and if you feel this way, that's totally your choice. I like 
the results that come from the conferences, I've been to all of them 
since 2013, on my dime for 3, and with assistance for 3. I felt it was 
100% worth it for all.

>> Nobody cares to debate something that has already been scheduled and 
>> planned, the time to bring up concerns was earlier, when you brought 
>> it up before. But that failed to convince, now it's decided, time to 
>> move on.
> 
> So you agree with me that there's no point in "debating" it again, 
> perhaps you should have addressed this comment to Mike then?

Mike didn't start the debate in this thread, you did. Consider how one 
feels when careful deliberation is made, and a final decision, combined 
with an announcement is made. Would you like to have people question 
your decisions AFTER they are made, and commitments have already been 
established? The time to question them is before they are made, not 
after. Questioning after is simply viewed (rightly) as sour grapes. You 
didn't get your way, move on.

>>> If it's such a great idea, that should be an easy case to make, 
>>> compared to the alternatives given. Yet all I get is a bunch of 
>>> stone-walling, suggesting no reasoning was actually involved, just 
>>> blindly aping others and the past.
>>
>> It is easy, for those who have attended conferences and like them -- 
>> they work well. All past dconfs are shining examples. Just drop it and 
>> move on to something else. You lost the battle for this one, it's no 
>> longer up for discussion.
> 
> Heh, there was no "battle," as most of those responding didn't even 
> understand what I wrote, like Iain above, gave no arguments (we "like 
> them -- they work well"), and as finally clear from Mike and Walter's 
> responses here, there was no real deliberation on the matter.

You think they just flipped a coin one day, and didn't think about any 
past experience at all? No real thinking must have gone into it because 
only intelligent people can come to the conclusion you reached, right? 
This kind of "debate" where the assumption is that only my way is 
correct is common out there these days, it's tiring. The best thing you 
can do is start a competing conference style and show how it works 
better. I'm sure Walter and Andrei would not discourage more D 
conferences or conference-like gatherings.

> Since they don't take DConf seriously, I see no reason to either: I'll 
> just start ignoring it from now on.

That's unfortunate, but not anything I can change. You have contributed 
a lot in terms of the android port, although I haven't really programmed 
in android (I have a tiny bit, with Xamarin (hated it) and a bit with 
Java (was OK, but crazy complicated) ). I hope at some point you 
reconsider, I'd love to see a presentation on it.

-Steve