1 |
Am Thu, 6 Oct 2011 00:18:49 +0100 |
2 |
schrieb Peter Humphrey <peter@××××××××××××××.org>: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Wednesday 05 October 2011 17:47:21 Jonas de Buhr wrote: |
5 |
> |
6 |
> > sometimes things indeed need to change in order to improve. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> I remember things being improved. While I was in my 50s I was |
9 |
> continually faced with youngsters' ideas for improving the company's |
10 |
> methods. Stupid, every one. When challenged, they couldn't say how |
11 |
> their proposed new "solutions" would lead to specified gains by |
12 |
> anybody, but the changes were forced through anyway. This isn't |
13 |
> get-up-and-go; it's I've-got-to-make-my- mark. |
14 |
|
15 |
i never said change equals improvement or change for the sake of change |
16 |
is a good thing. and i pointed out that i cannot judge this for grub2 |
17 |
since i don't know it. |
18 |
but the reverse is true too - rejecting every change just because its |
19 |
not "how we always did it" potentially keeps you from making important |
20 |
development. |
21 |
|
22 |
most of the "oh it's so weird"-whining often comes from just not being |
23 |
used to it. flip your door lock upside down - you'll hate it with |
24 |
passion for a week and then you won't even notice. flip it again and |
25 |
the process will repeat. |
26 |
|
27 |
at your age you should be able to look at things with a little more |
28 |
distance and insight instead of ripping statements out of context and |
29 |
insulting people. |
30 |
|
31 |
that said, even without context, that statement is still true. you just |
32 |
derived wrong statements from it using flawed logic. |
33 |
|
34 |
/jonas |