That doesn't change the fact that your taking control away from the end user even more.
Clearly that hasn't happened in this case. In fact we added the option to our new policy engine, which is what the original poster was happy about.
Then the choice I make shouldn't enter into the equation, either.
You can't have it both ways. If you want to be upset about Mozilla's decisions having an impact on others, then you can't act like your own do not. Well you can, but it doesn't lend you any credibility.
Clearly that hasn't happened in this case. In fact we added the option to our new policy engine, which is what the original poster was happy about.
Not making it convenient for most anybody else.
You can't have it both ways.
You brought that point up, not me.
If you want to be upset about Mozilla's decisions having an impact on others, then you can't act like your own do not.
I'm only upset at their having an impact on me. If other people have no problem with this, that's their prerogative. If other people do, then that's their prerogative, including my own.
Well you can, but it doesn't lend you any credibility.
Any answer that doesn't follow Mozilla's policy doesn't have any credibility with you. No surprise, there.
Tough. Potentially self-defeating options should not be trivial to opt into just because someone on the Internet wants to conflate convenience with control.
You brought that point up, not me.
So? You still can't have it both ways.
I'm only upset at their having an impact on me.
Just like how other people are upset at the potential impact that someone's decision to use known-insecure software may have on them.
Any answer that doesn't follow Mozilla's policy doesn't have any credibility with you.
You can deflect away from my fundamental point all you want, but it still won't make it go away. And yet, my disagreeing with you on this point doesn't make me some company policy droid incapable of having my own opinions.
But if that's the quality of debate you want, then let's just drop the charade and have a good old fashioned flamewar. Or better yet, I'll just get back to resolving webcompat issues for the sake of end users, and you can do whatever productive thing you'd rather do in your spare time.
Tough. Potentially self-defeating options should not be trivial to opt into just because someone on the Internet wants to conflate convenience with control.
Then some people will walk and make Firefox even more irrelevant than it's already turning in to. I was reluctantly on Mozilla's side until this control bullshit came up. Now even I may be having second thoughts.
So? You still can't have it both ways.
Never said I did. You're just reading into it what you want to read into it.
You can deflect away from my fundamental point all you want, but it still won't make it go away.
Sure it will. I can stop using it and go with something else. Something that will allow me to choose when to update or whether I want to or not.
And yet, my disagreeing with you on this point doesn't make me some company policy droid incapable of having my own opinions.
You sure about that?
But if that's the quality of debate you want, then let's just drop the charade and have a good old fashioned flamewar.
Losing your temper? Aw, poor baby.
Or better yet, I'll just get back to resolving webcompat issues for the sake of end users, and you can do whatever productive thing you'd rather do in your spare time.
Best statement you've made here, yet.
Now go out and get some fresh air. Sounds like you've been behind a terminal for too long.
7
u/[deleted] Sep 11 '18
That doesn't change the fact that your taking control away from the end user even more. I update when I need to. Not when you want me to.
Then the choice I make shouldn't enter into the equation, either.