Subject: Re: User-facing applications
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>
Date: 28 Mar 2002 12:03:00 +0900

>>>>> "Lynn" == Lynn Winebarger <owinebar@free-expression.org> writes:

    Lynn> On Wednesday 27 March 2002 15:34, David Fetter wrote:

    >> On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 03:18:50PM -0500, Lynn Winebarger
    >> wrote:

    >> > Usually they can't really tell you what they want within
    >> > reason (clearly what they want is a telepathically-linked
    >> > DWIM machine, but that's a useless answer), or even know what
    >> > they want - except that what you've got isn't it.

    >> That's not a terribly productive attitude on your part.  Those
    >> people are at least as much a part of the reality of making
    >> software as the machines on which the software runs.

    Lynn>      It's a fact, not an attitude.

You're 90% correct, but the way a fact is expressed matters.  (The 10%
is in the assumption that _nothing_ you can do will elicit "what they
want within reason.")

I recently deliberately used a very similar form of expression,
because either it quickly strips the leading "l" from "luser", or they
go away.  Not nice, but when conserving on your own time is important,
and you _really_ don't care if (or would rather that) they go away,
it's effective.  If I'd been in "user education mode" rather than "is
there really a bug here I can fix?" mode, I would have done it very
differently.

I think that's what David is referring to as "attitude."

I'm not sure whether form of expression matters "just among us" on
FSB.  But I definitely lean toward thinking it does.

-- 
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences     http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
              Don't ask how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.