Feature - Rejected Need a preference for disabling everything that anybody has ever called "annoying".

Raijinili

Member
As it is targeted to people on this board (this was linked to in response to another topic on the board), it certainly qualifies as trolling.

As for being a serious request, I'd like to point out that it's very immature and unprofessional to allow this to pass as written. There's being annoyed at the userbase, and there's taking it out on them in your product.

Still, if you want to limit the topic to discussing how whiny some users are, this is off-topic. No one's seriously discussing adding the feature, right?
 

stannius

Member
I have a concern with this proposed feature. Some people apparently find the idea of this preference checkbox annoying. Thus, clicking the checkbox should remove the checkbox. This may cause the universe to implode.
 

holatuwol

Developer
No one's seriously discussing adding the feature, right?
Not yet, but that doesn't mean that a serious discussion couldn't evolve from it, since many people have asked for very similar things in the past (different sets of default values indicating a user's tolerance level for automation, for example), and some ideas like that actually do get implemented.

I mean, the gist of what everyone with something positive to contribute is "trying" to say is that just because it doesn't sound sensible to you doesn't mean that some variation of it won't sound sensible to you. Which is why you constructively build on what someone else has thought was a good idea, rather than suggest ways to undo all the work they've planned in order to get there.
 

Raijinili

Member
If we're going to talk about it that way...

What about a project to convert all of Mafia's color coding stuff to style sheets? That's a suggestion from DeadNed in /hardcore. I'd participate if given instructions on what to look for and a file assignment. The advantage of a style sheet is that Mafia can have a default sheet (and of course a "Dump Default Sheet" command, possibly through the gCLI), and users can override parts of it by just adding a .css file to their preferences.

Firefox uses .css for... I've not really looked at the details, but the size of toolbars, as well as their heights, can be controlled using stylesheets.
 

fronobulax

Developer
Staff member
What about a project to convert all of Mafia's color coding stuff to style sheets?

Will the suggestion work for text rendered by Java code as opposed to a browser? My hunch is that a lot of code would have to change to make that true but I don't honestly know.
 

Darzil

Developer
Firefox uses .css for... I've not really looked at the details, but the size of toolbars, as well as their heights, can be controlled using stylesheets.

It uses it for pretty much all formatting now, as Firefox is deprecating other formatting methods. I guess they consider that legacy websites aren't worth reading. I guess that's Web 2.0 in a nutshell, only current content matters.

For example, a TEXT colour tag in a BODY element applies to text but not tables, in FF 4 and 5, whereas in earlier FF it applied to both. BGCOLOR in a BODY element still applies to both. And this isn't considered a /bug, instead it is considered that all legacy websites not using stylesheets need to be re-written.
 
Last edited:

archely

New member
I didn't really understand before I started developing content for mafia, but now I get it. One of the first things pieces of code I produced for mafia was to replace a long string of buttons in daily deeds with a combobox. That piece of code, all told, probably represented 30-40 hours of my time. Granted, 3/4 of that was orienting myself to the codebase and teaching myself extra bits of java, but that's not really the point. Within a day or two of that getting committed, there were at least two posters on GD complaining that the old way was "objectively better" and the current feature "annoying."

If this post is referring to me (at least in the annoying part, I couldn't find the objectively better thing), here and here, then there is some major reading comprehension fail going on. Either that or you are willfully misrepresenting me in order to make a point. I think it's pretty clear that I did not use the word annoying to refer to the added feature, but rather to the obviously bugged behavior that I was seeing. Not only that, but I made my level of expertise regarding the back end abundantly clear, qualified the word annoying with kinda, and added a smiley face. Would you take more kindly to the term "mildly irritating" ? Maybe not. I was unaware the word annoying was so taboo, and used it in the sense of "this is sort of bothering me, but not really a big deal," which is how I would guess most people use it.

Somehow, I had even deluded myself into thinking that I was doing the developers a favor by commenting on a behavior that seemed to be simply broken on its face. Next time I guess I'll hesitate a bit more before putting my observation out there, and that doesn't help anyone.

The idea that the terms "annoying" and even "aggravating" are verbally bashing the program in some way on their own is, frankly, ridiculous. Context and intent matter. If you can't tell intent, because this is the internet after all, the best way to find out is probably to ask. I love the program, and I really appreciate that the time you've put into it helps me save my own real life time and makes my kol life easier. Equating constructive criticism (or even attempts at constructive criticism from those who do not have the same level of technical knowledge) with verbal abuse or personal attack or mafia is teh sux0r is absurd.

Edit: And I must apologize for again somewhat derailing the fact that the thread may have taken a constructive turn. However, I wanted to at least address the fact that I felt my comments were being taken out of context.
 
Last edited:

fronobulax

Developer
Staff member

roippi

Developer
If this post is referring to me (at least in the annoying part, I couldn't find the objectively better thing)

Nah, my remark wasn't directed at you. I remember your critiques being fine, though my memory might have altered things a smidge due to the other poster's tone.
 

Theraze

Active member
archely, from what I briefly read on your threads, those were fine. The 'annoying' thing is regarding posts like this one and this one. It's mainly an attempt to avoid aggressive, emotive language that doesn't describe the problem itself but places the bug/behaviour reporter in a confrontation with the developer without any easy mutual goal to work towards...

To say it differently, when at work someone sent an email proposing new power strips and included in that a few lines about how my department didn't do work and we were all biased against energy efficient equipment and so forth, he was being sarcastic. I read it as such, knowing him, but some of the other people included in the email were highly offended.
The thing to remember is, online, we don't get tone or intent. You may love the program, but all we get is the words on the page.
Your posts included information and helped roippi solve the problem. Good post!
Those posts I linked above both involved language that either drew no attention/response (in the second post) from current developers, as roippi wasn't a developer at the time of answering either post, or an avowal to ignore the problem (the first), and neither added anything to the problem besides making it clear they'd like some action that someone else had asked for in a less inflamatory way. Bad posts!
 

zarqon

Well-known member
I saw this thread and chuckled to myself, thinking there must have been some poor fools that recently rubbed our dear Veracity the wrong way. I started reading the thread, prepared to add something witty in support of the feature (just as alert reader Bale did), thinking it to be an embittered but mostly just funny joke. Much to my surprise, I found reactions of defensiveness, accusations, and general rancor.

I'm disappointed that it has come to this. Veracity is one of our champions -- we ought to cheer her on to greater coding exploits, not consume her very valuable time with personal arguments. Just think -- everyone who argues with her, prompting a response, is pointlessly taking time and emotional energy away from KoLmafia development. My friends, raise your eyes. There are principles here that trump the principles you're upset about.

Anyone who's been around for a while knows that Veracity is awesome but there are some things that really get her goat, so in the interest of not only peace and harmony but also mafia development, we need to be careful not to do those things. She's been known to ignore feature requests that are not worded to her liking, even if the feature might have been worthwhile (and that's her prerogative, by the way). But despite her proclivity to take umbrage at certain words and tones, through the years she has been the most consistent mafia developer, often fixing problems or making the reports for them before users even get around to it. She is usually the one to add new content. She often works with the feature requester to arrive at a solution which is better than the original feature request. Criticizing her or engaging in a personal argument with her is entirely counterproductive, regardless of whether or not it's justified. The devs are our treasures, and long-term commitment such as Veracity has shown ought to have earned her the right to blow off a little steam by making posts like this one.

One more thing: Veracity can be as "unprofessional" as she likes, since this is not her job. None of us have hired her services. She is perfectly free to say "No, I won't add this feature, because the requester's name is spelled funny." None of us would be entitled to complain about that. She is also free to completely stop developing KoLmafia -- which scares me and ought to scare you.

Haven't you ever played D&D? Don't piss off the DM -- it's their world. They decide what happens to us. Don't piss off the DM -- it may have negative consequences for the entire party. Don't piss off the DM -- they make the party's world turn. Us PC's are less important to the enjoyment of the game. And isn't the enjoyment of the game why we're here?

In short, the same standards don't apply to DM's and PC's. Consider the party before arguing with the DM, no matter how justified you believe yourself. Even if it's out of character for you to be conciliatory, you won't get any role-playing experience points here for remaining argumentative. Most of us just want to have fun, and an upset DM makes for a not-very-fun game.

Veracity, I for one found your feature request darkly funny. And, you can make as many "off-topic" posts as you want in my threads. I hope to see you posting there again soon. Now, about some of those proxy record feature requests... :)
 

Raijinili

Member
There is a very big difference between not working on someone's request and posting on their topic, "I don't like you so I'm not working on your request." Veracity is totally in her right to ignore my topics. She may even be in the right to tell me that she's doing so. Posting it in public, as a display of power over a person who pissed her off, seems kind of... yeah.

And I'll admit I was wrong to report the post knowing that she would see the report, rather than discussing it directly with another mod.
 

lostcalpolydude

Developer
Staff member
Short of someone hacking Veracity's forum account and turning it into a spambot, reporting a post of hers or bringing it up with another mod is almost certainly a waste of time. It would be like having an issue with a post by Jick on the main KoL forum; no matter how bad you think the post is, the forum follows their rules.
 

holatuwol

Developer
What about a project to convert all of Mafia's color coding stuff to style sheets? That's a suggestion from DeadNed in /hardcore. ... Firefox uses .css for... I've not really looked at the details, but the size of toolbars, as well as their heights, can be controlled using stylesheets.
Comparison to Firefox is a bit awkward, since being able to skin it with CSS was made possible because the language/platform used to build the Firefox UI, rather than a conscious addition on the part of the Firefox team. Even the fact that it renders CSS at all for web pages is a side-effect of its choice of rendering engine rather than something consciously built into it.

The reason I preface with that is because Java support for CSS inside of a JComponent is very minimal compared to Java support for CSS elsewhere (like, say, Android development). I did a quick test on how well Java would handle all of this (I inserted a style tag with nobr { color : olive }) and it styled <nobr>blah</nobr> just fine, but <nobr><b>blah</b></nobr> was a nice user-friendly black. I imagine similar limitations will exist in terms of CSS class inheritence and those stylesheets could wind up a bit more frustrating than working with than any other technologies that recognize CSS might suggest.

Not saying it's a bad idea, since I definitely like the idea of a preference being much more easily shared and there being one giant one in a separate file instead of something with a bajillion buttons in the preferences panel, but I wanted to make sure proper expectations were set.
 
Last edited:

roippi

Developer
The reason I preface with that is because Java support for CSS inside of a JComponent is very minimal compared to Java support for CSS elsewhere (like, say, Android development). I did a quick test on how well Java would handle all of this (I inserted a style tag with nobr { color : olive }) and it styled <nobr>blah</nobr> just fine, but <nobr><b>blah</b></nobr> was a nice user-friendly black. I imagine similar limitations will exist in terms of CSS class inheritence and those stylesheets could wind up a bit more frustrating than working with than any other technologies that recognize CSS might suggest.

Not saying it's a bad idea, since I definitely like the idea of a preference being much more easily shared and there being one giant one in a separate file instead of something with a bajillion buttons in the preferences panel, but I wanted to make sure proper expectations were set.

Yeah, one of the major limitations is Java 1.4. There are significant changes in .5 and .6 to make support of html better.
 

holatuwol

Developer
Yeah, one of the major limitations is Java 1.4. There are significant changes in .5 and .6 to make support of html better.
Yeah, better but not enough for you to rely on HTML too much for your UI, as I did my test in 1.6u26 and ran into that problem.
 

heeheehee

Developer
Staff member
Yeah, one of the major limitations is Java 1.4. There are significant changes in .5 and .6 to make support of html better.

What exactly is the reason that we're still supporting Java 1.4? I mean, it came out in like... 2002. (granted, the bane of all web developers is IE6, which came out a year before that, and Microsoft has officially EOL'd that... and yet it still held around a 10% market share when Microsoft launched their "Stop using this terrible product, even we're embarrassed by it" campaign). What's the share of people on 1.4? Quick googling seems to indicate less than 2%, but not sure how reliable that is.)
 

holatuwol

Developer
What exactly is the reason that we're still supporting Java 1.4?
The reason I stuck with Java 1.4 back in the days when I was active was because a few people I knew and liked were running Mac OS 10.3, and that only has up to Java 1.4. No idea if anyone is still using OS 10.3 right now, but if there are people in that boat, they have no Java update options. Personally, I'm still using Mac OS 10.4 on my pretty (but ancient) iMac G5, so I don't have the cool time machine option that seemed really cool when Veracity was describing it when it first came out.
 
Top