Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1

On 1/1/25 10:25 AM, chrisv wrote (a butthurt double post)

-hh wrote:
 

(snipped, unread)

 The -highhorse snit sees an advocate or two admitting that they have
no experience with Photoshop.  The snit sees an opportunity to attack.
He claims that advocate "haters" have been unreasonable.  They have
been "loudly critical" of a product that they have no experience with.
 When challenged, the snit moves the goal posts to advocates talking
about prices and values, which he asserts is being "loudly critical"
of the more-expensive product.

Gosh, it couldn't have been for the reason that chrisv snipped:
[quote]
Unfortunately, the only way that this point actually becomes "reasonable" is by finally admitting that many/most Linux fanboys are chronic consummate cheapskates.
[/quote]
Nothing wrong being frugal, but with YA post today of YA Goodwill find (this one a Optiplex 9020 Micro for $12), there is an undue amount of attention paid in COLA on money.

The snit also positively *gloats* about the fact that one advocate,
sdb, made a stupid argument in the course of one such discussion about
value.

No, I'm under no obligation to cite every COLA poster who's been a fool.
sbd wasn't the only one:  merely a spectacularly  dumb example.  For example, Homer was known for this with Photoshop too ("£600").

But even if one accepts the snittish claim that calling Photoshop
"expensive" or whatever constitutes being "loudly critical" of it, the
initial attack was that we were unreasonably critical of something
that we had no experience with, and thus were ignorant of.

Ignorance as a factor becomes relevant when they overstep, such as by attempting to claim GIMP as an equivalent & suitable alternative.
Its no different than criticizing BMWs for being 'overpriced junk' when being ignorant on how that product is differentiated in the market.

But the price has always been known!  Being "critical" of the price is
*not* being critical of something we have no experience with and thus
are ignorant of!

When you're ignorant, just how do you make an informed assessment on a product's utility, for its potential Return on Investment (ROI)?  Hmm?
TL;DR:  dividing by zero (knowledge) is a fool's errand.

So, -highhorse's attack *fails* even if one accepts his snittish claim
calling Photoshop "expensive" and comparing value is "loud" "criticism
on cost".
 As usual, -highhorse attacked using nothing but idiocy and lies.  As
usual, -highhorse failed.

No, its noting that 'dividing by zero' (ignorance) is a fool's errand.

And let's consider sdb's brain-fart of ten (or whatever) years ago.
This is about the best that -highhorse can do, apparently. 

No, I'm under no obligation to cite every COLA poster who's been a fool.

Yes, sdb arbitrarily assigned a one cent price to GIMP, to compare relative
values.  Yes, it was stupid.  Notice the absolute *pleasure*
-highhorse gets out of this single example.  The guy is a genuine
fscking *asshole*, folks.

But you *do* remember sbd; its why I chose a memorable example.

And sdb's brain-fart was only that.  He wasn't being an asshole.  He
wasn't attacking anyone using idiocy and lies.

Except that sbd came back briefly as butthurt sore luzer, just like you're being ... again.
The difference between the two of you is that sbd learned the lesson which you still haven't, namely:  "if you don't like being called out for saying stupid stuff, don't say stupid stuff".
-hh