On Wednesday 01 September 2004 23:14, Carlos Leonhard Woelz wrote:
> Not sure this is a core devel issue, but since I replied to
> kde-usability, I will reply here as well.
>
> I should have replied to the original message, but here goes my
> (unsolicited) my comment on this situation:
>
> On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 20:13:49 +0000, "Frans Englich"
>
> <frans.englich@telia.com> said:
> > Aaron replied:
> > "i think that by simply going ahead and pretending to represent KDE's
> > usability processes, including writing articles that are, quite frankly,
> > embarrassing to those involved in the project is not useful and in fact
> > hurts
> > our efforts. i have no plans for KUA at this point due to this and due to
> > your limited knowledge in the field that is directly reflected by your
> > solo
> > efforts in this regard. we have several usability professionals that are
> > getting involved in KDE usability and KUA does nothing to enable this
> > process."[6]
>
> This comment is hardly constructive. Moreover: it is a flamewar starter.
> Sometimes we have to build bridges to bring people in, instead of
> repelling motivated people. The "usability is for the pros" argument is
> not 100% true: there are tons of usability tasks that are a function of
> work more than experience (I am *not* claiming anyone is saying this, it
> is preemtive argument :p ). Therefore, finding common ground between
> motivated developers, independent of each other (perceived)
> qualifications, is the obvious thing to do.
>

I second this.

Saying KUA is crap a month after the first proposal 
(http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-usability&m=108939865814380&w=2) and several 
status updates (http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-usability&m=109141666813256&w=2 / 
http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-usability&m=109345329409014&w=2) isn't a good 
constructive style. Especially when one missed the chance to critize the work 
early and even offered to write an KUA article 
(http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-usability&m=109141804427229&w=2).

Christian