On 5/15/23 22:58, WilliamJames wrote:

> The motivations of the delusional self can often lead to suffering.
> 
> https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00124/full
> 

Good discussion and fascinating stuff.

Ali

On 5/15/23 05:09, ag0aep6g wrote:

> What did you guys do every Friday for 14 weeks?

My self is too embarrassed to admit. I am trying to get rid of him (her? them?) first. :p

>>  > What does it cost?
>>
>> Hiç.
>
> Je suis désolé, mais je ne parle pas français.

It was a bad joke about adding a Turkish word to the colloqial "zero, zilch, zip, nada, nothing".

Ali

On Tuesday, 16 May 2023 at 11:14:23 UTC, Abdulhaq wrote:
> On Tuesday, 16 May 2023 at 05:46:23 UTC, WilliamJames wrote:
>  As
>> such, IVY could well backfire in the D community, since not everyone agrees that there is a self, or that it should be as important in ones daily life as some want you to believe
>
> And the award for the whackiest criticism of D management goes to .....

So the whackiest..thing... was not something I started ;-)

Telling people the D was off to a grand new beginning, cause people were going to find a better vision of them themselves... that was the whackiest thing.

It's one thing to find ways to motivate oneself. If IVY works for you, that is great.. I guess.

But announcing IVY to the D community as the messiah-like stratedgy for taking D forward.... sounded more (to me at least) like a cult was forming.

And yet, you direct your criticism towards me ??

On Tuesday, 16 May 2023 at 22:17:13 UTC, WilliamJames wrote:
> On Tuesday, 16 May 2023 at 11:14:23 UTC, Abdulhaq wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 16 May 2023 at 05:46:23 UTC, WilliamJames wrote:

>
> And yet, you direct your criticism towards me ??
>

It's not intended as a criticism of any person, but thinking about it I can see how you might take it as such.

Seriously though, over the years Mike has demonstrated he's a very solid and sensible person. We should give him the benefit of the doubt. I know that you know this, but successful project management depends on more than assigning bug fix tickets, the soft stuff is very important too.

On Tuesday, 16 May 2023 at 22:17:13 UTC, WilliamJames wrote:
> But announcing IVY to the D community as the messiah-like stratedgy for taking D forward.... sounded more (to me at least) like a cult was forming.

I think a lot of people here are having extreme reactions to something that was not meant to be the main focus of the discussion; rather it's a means to an end for improving the mentality of those who are working on D.

It's only fair to criticize it if we see that it doesn't work in the coming months.

On Wednesday, 17 May 2023 at 11:26:41 UTC, Abdulhaq wrote:
> Seriously though, over the years Mike has demonstrated he's a very solid and sensible person.

Exactly my thoughts. I'm as sceptic as the next person, but heck this is coming from Mike.

On 17.05.23 16:56, Mike Parker wrote:
> I thought Dennis had gotten to the same place by the end. I see now he hasn't, but he's still willing to give it a go.

Dennis has been part of the 14-week group, right? He's been exposed to the same amount of IVY in the same manner as you. Still, in your opinion, he didn't "get it" (yet). How many people participated, and how many "got it"? What's IVY's "success" rate?

My impression of Dennis is that he's competent and communicates well. I don't remember his ego getting in the way of things. I can't speak that well of some bigger names in D land. (Yeah, I'm being petty and holding a grudge.)

Of the people that I know participated (you, Dennis, Ali, and I'm assuming Walter, Atila, Andrei(?)), I trust Dennis's judgment the most. Him not being particularly excited by IVY suggests to me that it might not be the greatest thing since chocolate was invented. On the other hand, he doesn't seem particularly alarmed by it either. Which is a good thing.

Of course, it's easy for me to praise Dennis now. I already know his opinion of IVY aligns more with my (uninformed) one. But I like to think that I would have put him on top of that list anyway.

> IVY is more than just vision statements. It's a mindset, a shift in perspective. Some people will "get it", some won't. And that's fine.
[...]
> The more contributors who get it, the better, as it will make it easier for us to collaborate. But we can still work with people who don't get it, or who don't want to. So it's not going to bar anyone from contributing if they want nothing to do with it.

The way you talk about it still rubs me the wrong way. Maybe I'm too eagerly trying to find something wrong, but it just reminds me so much of empty con man talk, and your refusal to engage here is so much not helping.

> What it comes down to at its core is communication. That's the heart of it.

Yet you refuse to communicate in the established channel. You insist on communicating in a way that better suits you, a way that is less transparent.

I guess it comes down to this: You're not going to communicate publicly (because you're afraid of giving the wrong impression to 3rd parties), and I'm not going to communicate privately (because I like to be a pain in your behind). So we're at an impasse. We both refuse to move and that's it.

> I promise, everyone will learn more about IVY as we go along. I just want to speak to some regular contributors about it first so we can get down to business with it sooner rather than later, and so I can see if my approach to explaining it works. If they get it, then they can help me help others get it. And as I write about the work we're doing in the coming weeks, I'll be throwing in some details about how we're employing IVY so that people can get an idea of what it looks like in action.

Maybe in a couple of weeks it will all make perfect sense. Until then I will put IVY away as irrelevant to me. The only actual information I've got is from Dennis, and from that it doesn't seem like something I'd be down for.

> I'm going to hang out in BeerConf a bit this month. While I'm there, I'm happy to answer any questions about IVY and how we're employing it. It's much easier to communicate what it is in a real-time context than in the forums. And my offer still stands to chat about it with anyone who's interested.

I strongly dislike that you refuse to do that here.

I don't care for DConf or BeerConf. I haven't participated and I'm not going to. I don't think I've even watched one whole DConf talk ever.

If you guys want to be social, be social. I'm not trying to take that away from you. But if you make those social events mandatory, you're pushing me further away. If the only way to get information about a new big development in D land is to chat with you, or to participate in the Confs, then I'm not going to get it.