"rules are rules" is hardly a cop-out. If we stick to the rules, we don't have to discuss them endlessly, and can (hopefully) move on to other things.
It is a cop-out, because it means that they get pointed to, without thinking. It becomes a trite answer and nothing changes. The real question is why you actually need rules. Good men don't need rules. Today's not the day to find out why I have so many.
I acknowledge that the rules do not permit discussion of Wedge. But that doesn't mean that I like the rules, nor that I agree with them. The problem with having the rules as you defend them is that they don't permit negotiation or leeway, and allows people to hide behind them without saying what they really feel. Motoko doesn't have to, for example, actually find any real arguments to denigrate Wedge, he just has to point out the non-compliance with the rules. It's a form of passive aggression, when you get down to it. It allows SMF to pass judgement - both in itself and on behalf of its users - without having to actually admit to it.
The real question, though, is not whether the rules are wrong and/or need amendment, but do you need rules? I would direct you to your project's core values on the subject.
"We will treat others with consideration, high regard, courtesy and dignity; in a just, equitable and unbiased manner. We will demonstrate good manners, pay attention and treat others as we would like to be treated. We will be consistent, listen and be open to feedback, be careful making judgments about others, and treat people equally and equitably."
I'll admit to the good manners, for the most part. But I won't stand up and defend the project about the others.
Did you know that, for example, only a month or so ago I put Wedge in my signature - and it was removed a few days later? I'm not sure who removed it, but it was removed. That doesn't sound very courteous or unbiased to me.
In fact, over the last 3 years I've been dealing with SMF's community and ecosystem, I'd say there's a distinct lack of fairness across the board. I might even go as far as to suggest that nothing materially has changed in that time; there's a lot of changes of names, but nothing else.
Holding major Wedge discussions in chit-chat rather than in the Forks board seems like a compromise that is more-or-less satisfactory to everyone with a say in the rules on simplemachines.org.
Depends on your definition of compromise. It is symbolic of everything that's happened since Wedge was formed, not to mention all the stuff that happened with me and vbgamer before Wedge happened - that every single time, the definition of compromise is woefully and inappropriately wielded. Compromise means reaching a mutual agreement on both sides - but we were never asked what we thought. In other words, it's what the team thought was satisfactory and we were expected to toe the line. There is no way this can be called a compromise, unless you're seeing it with the same rose tinted lenses that the team generally use for any matter that requires them to give up anything.
The eventual success of the SMF software, community, or project is not on your shoulders.
I have never said it was. It's perfectly capable of shooting itself in the foot with anything from a shotgun to a tactical nuclear warhead without any assistance from me. Also, spare me the strawman.
The events of January 2010 that almost imploded SMF were done without any help from me. Even though I was approached beforehand by Amy and asked where I stood if such a line would be drawn, and I said my loyalty was to the project, not the people in it, I had left the team before it kicked off, nor was I one of the folks banned for linking to Jeff's blog. I had no meaningful part in the way that played out.
The fact it took 5 years to get from first starting 2.0 to final release wasn't impeded by me. I contributed some bug reports, I contributed some bug fixes. Three of those years passed before I even came along.
I could go on but you get my point. All the big mis-management issues with SMF, including the NPO by all accounts, had very little real input from me, and what input there was, was mostly ignored, even though I've called it pretty much correctly every time.
You may feel that the SMF project would sometimes serve itself better by making different choices than it has made.
I sometimes agree with you, and sometimes disagree with you. I appreciate it when you test and show the results of your testing. I generally have no argument with either one of you. I believe this to be true of many other members of the SMF project, even some members who have argued with one or the other of you in the past.
I don't feel that's the case. I KNOW that's the case. It's gone beyond being a feeling and has been that way for years. But hey, what do I know?
Actually, let's turn that around. What do I know? Well, I read the years and years of history in the team boards while I was still a team member. Nothing that's happening now is anything new. The constant developer churn has been going on for years, because all the people that could possibly make a difference keep being pushed away, either because they get put upon by the rest of the team (who have a lot to say and not backing any of it up by action) and get burned out, or they just get pushed out by the attitude of the project as a whole, which is why I left (though the fact there are a lot of people who have a lot to say and aren't prepared to actually do anything about it)
But all those people inside the project don't appear to be able to see this. Pretty much everyone I've spoken to seems to be happy to deny that this is the case - except it is the case. Why is it that smCore is basically dead? Why Norv and Fustrate (and Spuds, as far as I can tell) have all disappeared?
Why is it that SMF 2.1 is still in alpha, despite being only a few months younger than Wedge, but with far more people who have input into it?
The eventual success of SMF is not dependent on me. There was a time when I used to believe I could make a difference, when I could actually do something that might push SMF along. The last 2 and a half years have actually made me feel like Wedge has done more to push SMF along than SMF itself has.
What were your goals then? What are they now? Which of these goals are worth pursuing in the future? Does the Wedge project bring progress towards these goals? Does it do it at an acceptable cost?
To make something cool. Now? My goal is to get Wedge to a point where it has enough developed that it doesn't need me. The project is getting there. Cost? I don't know. The amount of crap I put up with certainly doesn't make it feel worthwhile most of the time.
People enter and leave FLOSS projects and communities all the time for various reasons. If the product is compelling enough, there is always someone arriving interested in picking up where someone else has left off. An enduring project will have to accomodate and encourage this succession.
Take a long, hard look at SMF. A very long hard look. Then tell me that there is enough people arriving into the SMF ecosystem to keep it going. Because from where I'm standing, that's just not happening, because of the aforementioned close knit coven that keeps pushing the good people out.
Don't stay in it out of vague "quitter's guilt" alone. Stay in it because you are working toward noble goals. And plan to replace yourself. You are unlikely to stay in it forever, no matter how noble the goals.
I stopped having noble goals months ago, mostly because of all the BS dragged in this direction by various members of the SMF community. For months I've been working on the noble goal of the ecosystem being self supportible, because once that happens, I can safely leave. You call it quitter's guilt, I call it building a viable ecosystem. But once it's built, I can move on and do something actually worthwhile, because it feels like this isn't worthwhile any more - because it is getting devalued constantly by arguments including ones like this.