When twisted minds are given authority, we - the free spirits - end up with tyranny and censorship. It happens very fast, if we don’t fight back.
This is common knowledge for people using FaceBook, Google and YouTube. Unwanted information is gradually deleted and replaced with the accepted narrative through a number of arbitrary and tyrannical decisions.
A few minutes after “Mica” interrupted an interesting and friendly dialog here on discuss.pixls.us, my account was “silenced” (read: suspended) for 1 day.
This is the anonymous message: “You have been silenced from the forum until August 7, 2021, 3:00pm. Reason - Please take a break, this is becoming too negative.”
What exactly had become too negative? - and to whom?
I was debating with Alberto and Paul the ability for ART to create a certain mask without having a straight line function. That should be considered a constructive and positive dialog. Actually that should be exactly what discuss.pixl.us was made for.
But not according to a challenged “moderator” on this site. That entity is constantly luring for an excuse to interrupt and corrupt, and when nothing bad actually happens, it creates a situation by releasing one of the well known absolutely disconnected and useless comments.
How can such an anonymous avatar be accepted as a moderator??? Does it own this site - or does daddy?
Such persons are able to discredit the work of a number of seriously working members by simply corrupting the tone and atmosphere and make it all look like a kindergarten or an excursion to the finger paint academy.
Alberto,
Your ART needs a handful of improvements to bring it out of the narrow FOSS loop.
Unexpectedly - because you were introduced as an accommodating person - you have demonstrated your reluctance even to consider any of my suggestions - and with an annoying arrogance.
So I’ll leave you in peace - with your sixty percent finished product.
Of course, Paul - that’s your way to avoid a discussion about the item - a straight line function for the masking brush in ART. As long as everybody waste their time with all the personal details - then some people are deeply satisfied - because in that way they don’t need to have good arguments for their positions - the discussion has been derailed before they need to think. Elegantly - right?
Oh, I have got that tool Alberto. Know them all.
Just wanted to offer you a view into the world around, because your masking tool was interesting.
Good luck to you too.
For the record, I never said this would not be a good idea. In fact, I would certainly welcome this. But I don’t have enough interest to do this myself, because that’s not critical for the way I use the tool. So I was trying to point out possible alternatives, based on your first example. When you showed your second one, I admitted that this is something not easy to do currently in art, and that you are probably better served by other tools if that kind of use is important for you. If you want to call that arrogant, well, who am I to challenge your opinion?
I did. And I don’t like changing a dialog, which is tagged (even double tagged) for one software, to another software. It’s just confusing for the readers imho.
Alberto,
I don’t quite remember that explanation from you in the preceding dialog.
But let’s forget that.
The straight line masking function is so powerful that everybody have it - except … !
Lightroom, Adobe Camera Raw, Capture One, On1 Photo Raw, and a lot more - all RAW-editors.
I admitted up front that my masking example was unusual, but a lot of situations exist where a straight line is easier to make with the brush than with a rectangle or anything else - and finally that very mask could as well have been made in each of the mentioned raw editors - but was made in PS.
Now you argue, that you personally don’t need such a function, but I regard you to be the primary person to consider improvements in ART, that’s why I write to you. You are also the one person who in my opinion would feel responsible for the product and its popularity.
Indeed, I didn’t explain this earlier, that’s why I’m explaining this now. What I did (try to) answer was your question about whether you were missing anything, and I pointed out that maybe you didn’t consider the possibility of combining multiple kinds of masks to achieve your goal. Admittedly, I was replying under the assumption that you wanted to get the most out of art, which I now discovered was a completely baseless assumption to make. I understand instead that your goal is to provide advice, and that you have no interest in learning how to use art in its current form and with its current (many) limitations. In that case, thank you for your suggestion, I will certainly consider it. If I ever get to do this, I will make sure to mention you in the credits file.
That quote was from the second paragraph you wrote on this thread.
Your choice of words says a lot about who you are and how easily it is for you to annoy people. When you do that you only hurt yourself and lessen the chance of your being heard by the dev’s and by “others” who you say don’t have a clue. If that’s not arrogance then I don’t know what is.
That would be you, who resorts to name calling and some sort of weird conspiracy theory about who “owns” this. It is the same attitude that caused the other thread about this subject to be locked and caused your time out.
It is things like these statements that are unacceptable:
Open Source is a constant exercise in humility, from all ends-- developer, supporter, and user. When we don’t have that humility, you can see that things go bad very quickly, like here and now.
Good luck with your straight line mask. There are several options still to have it implemented: (1) implement it yourself and send a pull request, (2) pay someone to do it, or (3) wait and hope it just happens. You were convinced at the obviousness of the need for your wanted feature, but, as we learn time and time again, it isn’t obvious to everyone, and if it was obvious to a developer it’d be in the queue or already done. Again, humility would’ve been helpful here.
I know I should let go – I agree this is not productive anymore – but sometimes I just can’t.
How should I interpret all this, other than as “I am not interested in ART right now, I would only consider it if you add this and that and that…”?
With this premise, I understand that you might perceive my (and other people’s) suggestions for alternative ways of achieving your goal with the existing features as useless and missing the point… I can see that now. So, I wanted to reassure you that your suggestion is good, and that can certainly be considered. It’s still unlikely to happen, but never say never. And if it does happen, I will mention you in the credits, as I’ve done (or tried to do) with all the other people providing suggestions.
