There's a problem in the D economic system

[NaN]

On Thursday, 25 July 2019 at 09:37:38 UTC, Chris wrote:
>>
>> criticising other people because they arn't doing what you 
>> think they should be doing only works when you're actually 
>> paying them. And even then its not a great way to motivate 
>> people because if all you do is moan and criticise people stop 
>> listing. Doesn't matter if what you say is right or wrong, the 
>> delivery method kills any chance you have of being heard.
>
> See, you're using the same lines "stop whining", "do it 
> yourself".

I haven't told you what to do just pointed out that whining and 
criticising wont motivate anyone to listen to you never mind get 
them to do what you want.


> In D all this talk about "community effort" and "we're all in 
> the same boat" (no, we're not) is just a smokescreen. It only 
> serves to a) give the "followers" the impression that they are 
> part of something and

I've never seen anyone say we're all in the same boat. Quite 
clearly we're not. There's a small group of people who work on D, 
really invest their time in making it better, and there's a large 
group of people who just use D, I'm in that later group. While I 
might occasionally gripe about something I have no expectation 
that people in the first group owe me anything, they don't have 
to listen to me or care what I say, it's their time they are 
putting in. Im just grateful that they do what they do because in 
spite of its issues I still prefer D to any of the 7 or 8 other 
languages I've used over the last 25 years.


> b) to shut critics up.

Just because people disagree with you doesn't mean they are 
trying to silence you, as evidenced by the fact you speak up 
anytime one of these gripey threads pops up. The fact that you 
characterise it as such is interesting though.


> You've just admitted yourself that it "[d]oesn't matter if what 
> you say is right or wrong". So it's not about the issue at 
> hand, it's about suppressing criticism. At least you're honest 
> about it. Mind you, if it is more important _how_ something is 
> said and _who_ says it then _what_ is being said, then you're 
> entering the realm of ideology. It's certainly no longer 
> engineering.

Both are important. If you want people to listen you need to be 
respectful in stating your case and also listen and really 
consider their side too. Then if you want to actually influence 
them you have a convincing argument.

You've fallen at the first hurdle and the only person who can fix 
that is you.