[Fwd: [Fwd: Re: [kde-artists] NEWS flash from GNOME. :-D]]

[JRT]

Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> On 5/31/07, JRT <jrt256 at earthlink.net> wrote:
>> Several former KDE developers have privately emailed me to tell me other
>> wise.  And remember that we lost MOSFET because he couldn't stand the
>> way core developers treated him.
>>
>> So, if you have an idea and you advocate in favor of it, expect the same
>> kinds of abuse that I have received.  People will claim that this is a
>> "meritocracy" but what really seems to have merit is group think.
> 
> Meritocracy doesn't mean people always look only at arguments.
> Meritocracy means your reputation (based on what  you've done and are)
> is the base of your influence. So if you're a well-known core
> developer, who wrote a lot of great code, people tend to listen to
> you. If you mostly participated in flame-fests, and don't have much
> (high-profile) contributions on your name, people don't listen (yes,
> even if you're right).

You have correctly described the way that KDE works.  But to call that a 
meritocracy is a misuse of the word -- at least it isn't what Thomas 
Jefferson mean when he used the word.

The system you describe has some of the elements of cronyism.  And your 
description also provides some insight into why bug don't get fixed. 
Writing way cool code that is full of bugs is perceived as meritorious, 
but fixing those bugs goes unnoticed.

If this was really a meritocracy, I would have a high position in it due 
to my high IQ and college education.  But, I don't expect that.  When I 
first showed up, I was given the false impression that we were all 
peers.  If that is the case then, like in Animal Farm, some of us are 
more equal than others.

A system based on merit, not the merit of the individual, but the merit 
of ideas is the best system for any engineering project.

-- 
JRT