Observations regarding this forum / community

I’m around this project and the community since some time in 2017. During this time I’ve monitored the mailing list, qubes-issues and the forum since it exists. I can’t help but recognize that there are some community members like @unman, @adw and a few others that are always around, working to make the project and the community better and help new and existing users. They receive a little praise every now an then, but mostly they just contribute and are helpful through their actions (many of which you wouldn’t know about unless you’d monitor commits and tickets on github).

Then there are these other folks: they come into the community, criticize harshly and loudly (sometimes with reason), receive some feedback, then make it all about themselves and complain bitterly, drive the mods crazy and then rage and ultimately quit.

The way I see it, it’s like a credit / merit system:

  • people who contribute and help a lot have a large balance of good will and if they misstep or answer a bit moody it’s not a big deal – because everyone knows them and what they are about and people have bad days;
  • people that come in here and just s**t all over the place without contributing value have the opposite situation: they are already in debt and people also know what they are about and that their involvement more likely than not means that thread is doomed.

About what can be done to possibly improve the situation a bit.

Other forums have rating systems. Qubes OS forum engine also has something like that - it throws at user a lot of different “achievements” as they post and get likes, replies and etc, like in modern computer games. But this social rating (that you were talking about) is not visible when others read the topic at all.

Other forums show these elements of reputation (amount of likes, stars and other stuff) below the nick or avatar of the author on the left. I think it can not only motivate people to behave a little bit better, but show others some kind of reputation of people involved in the conversation and allow to value posts and opinions accordingly. Just an observation.



Qubes team are infallible thus, granted blind trust, minions are evil lusers with bad-intentions, mustn’t think for themselves or question authoritah thus, can not be trusted.


Not to “doom” the thread as you suggest :heavy_plus_sign: because I still like to imagine that civil discourse between adults is plausible … but, if we’re to follow @adw’s logic; you’re targeting myself passive-aggressively so, here goes anyway:

0.0) For posterity’s sake, let us at least make reference to the thread prompting this “discussion” which, in your opinion illustrates “people that come in here and just s**t all over the place without contributing value”, eh?

1.0) Within this thread, I made an on-topic reply which in no way ought have been misconstrued as anything other than respectful with empathetic, supportive, positive constructive input (aside from the fact that it was posted by @cayce, jah?).

1.0.a) However, due to reasons unbeknownst to myself (Perhaps @fepitre & @adw were (as you suggest) simply having a case of the “bad days”? :person_shrugging: Or, maybe we could chalk this up to the good ol’, ever versitile, standby cop out “language barrier”? :person_shrugging: Or, maybe, maybe they’re so hyperviligilant protective of their “baby” they’re ready to lash out at anyone who hasn’t “held” their baby? :person_shrugging: Or, maybe, maybe, maybe someone didn’t take their meds? :person_shrugging: Because neither has chosen to communicate effectively (as adults in conflict situations which seek resolution tend to do), we’ll never know. :person_shrugging: ) the anointed somehow chose to misinterpret because it was @cayce posting it MUST have been meant negatively.

The TWO points taken out of context were:


This is an opine, KEY words = “might go a long way”

Nowhere, NO(feckin’)WAY do I state that the Qubes team doesn’t take adoption seriously as @fepitre has for some reason interpreted.

personal reflection

Although, based on these bipolar requests for community support/effort while beating the drum of “you’re not us”, “we’re superior”, “respect my authoritah”-esque tantrums I can’t honestly say that I’m not considering leaning that way.


Which, is simply an observation of self-evident (as supported in detail by @adw’s response) confusion. Which is it? Community contributions are maintained by un-paid contributors on behalf of ITL and, ITL profits? Or, ITL contributes and the community profits? Both?

What’s more, it’s directly followed with:

CLEARLY advocating for ALL Qubes team (ITL & community alike), to profit.

C’mon, seriously is some alternate alphabet being displayed for some users?

  • Am I right?


The way I see it:

1.0) There’s two sides to each coin yet, you’d prefer to play with a two headed coin.

  • Am I right?


2.0.a) I’m pretty certain that you’re attempting & failing at directing this at myself yet, as the preceding thread and this thread clearly illustrate, posts by @adw & @fepitre are by and large examples of: “make it all about themselves”, “criticize harshly and loudly”, “complain bitterly” & ultimately rage ~and ultimately~ quit.

What’s especially quizzical is how each user seems to harp on the concept of “community” while, in this specific instance actuality only provide aggressive displays of divisive exclusivity.


3.0.a) You’re suggesting that double-standards (continue) to be imposed such that the anointed wear the crown and their subservient minions never fail to “kiss the ring”.

  • Am I right?


3.1.a) You’re suggesting that the anointed never :poop: on theirself (antecedent serving as a prime example) and thus the “community” audience ought never present any perspective which in any way … could … possibly … ever … somehow … someway be misperceived by the anointed as a threat to the “crown” and all of the un-anointed subservient, thankless (not actually the case for myself) minions MUST display their undying blind faith and “kiss the ring” at ALL times or be placed in the forum’s pillory.

  • Am I right?


3.2.a) Surely you jest? Re: contributions, to date (in just over four month’s active time), I’ve accrued:

  • Given 351 Likes
  • Received 126 Likes
  • Provided 13 Solutions
    (quite a few others either not assigned and/or privately)
  • IIRC, I even assisted yourself directly once (successfully) or twice (unknown), no?


  • Created shared several helpful projects to address common challenges other forums users have faced but no one else stepped up to deliver


  • :heavy_plus_sign: Roughly 30 additional on-deck problem-solving solutions which, I’m sharing privately until I can somehow find a way to put some faith into the concept of “community” here

Despite the abundance of persistently baseless attacks, ridicule, shaming, disrespect, threats of doxxing, threats of personal acts of violence, etc. etc. etc. etc.

I guess one can only dream of what might be achieved if said individual hadn’t the burden of 'splaining in snowflake-song so often.

/me “¯_ (ツ)_/¯”

In the illustrious words of @snoopdogg, “Patriarchy sure do be MF sometimes …”

Much thanks :pray: & blessings :prayer_beads: for the gift :gift: of this migraine :face_with_head_bandage:!

1 Like

I find it interesting that @Sven didn’t point out the comment at anyone in particular but there’s clearly one individual defending themselves.

1 Like

As do I equally find it interesting that a moderator lacks the ability to read before posting but, not as interesting as the uselessly feeble shame bullying coming from said moderator.

1 Like

No @cayce, not everything is about you.

Your case is much more complicated as you do contribute often in constructive ways. You could have a lots of credit, but you keep spending it the moment you earn it.

This thread is about a frustration that has accumulated over years.

If anything your reply in this thread is a powerful example of “make it all about themselves” with gratuitous insults and victimization language. I am bored of it and won’t fuel it any more.


At least one moderator has decided otherwise.

Wouldn’t quite work out in this situation because it’s emotionally invested, bully boys in control of moderation abilities but, the recommendation still stands.


1 Like

3 posts were split to a new topic: Mailing list does not require Google account

I think @Sven has an excellent point here. Myself I am not a very active contributor, but I do have read around every time I get an email from the forum. I love Qubes OS and actually use it live on quite a weak machine. Considering the massive achievement of making a quite reliable and “reasonably secure” operating system there is obvious value in having such a forum with the members – mainly – behaving respectfully and thus assisting the developers to make the OS even better.