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

[Jos Poortvliet]

On 5/31/07, JRT <jrt256 at earthlink.net> wrote:
> 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.

True. But the problem is, this is impossible. In many cases, you can't
judge an idea perfectly on it's value. It would take years of research
to get it perfectly right. You have to find a way to get a decent idea
of it's value in a reasonable time (this, btw, is what Kapitalism is
about, as well). And many things play a role here. Reputation is what
we use a lot for this. You have to earn one, then it will influence
how people think about your ideas. Not perfect, but EFFICIENT.

This is about theory versus real world.

And by the way, we here are much more equal already than in many other
FOSS projects, and even more so compared to commercial companies. So
yeah, it isn't a perfect meritocracy. But a perfect one would go under
in it's striving for perfection.

> --
> JRT