Calling him childish just for not wanting to deal with name drama (bikesheding) is simply projection.

Just locking the thread and telling people no is the right answer.

They were organizing a a dogpile there to comment and vote on this github issue. Why would you give in to a bully?

He should have just blocked anyone who downvoted his responses.

Also a fork of PuTTY? Who cares.

Why should he bother when it's done in bad faith.

His words:

> convinced me never to change kitty's name

He isn't refusing to respond to a bad-faith individual (no idea if all the people in the issue are from a reddit thread, or if that thread is even in bad faith) - he's refusing to ever change the name out of spite.

But it seems that you are also acting in bad-faith/trolling: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32057897

Yeah that would have convinced me too.

Why should I go out of my way to humor babies throwing a tantrum online? It just shows weakness of character. Just say no and move on.

You are part of the spite, welcome.

You’re coming across as extremely sensitive, and yet criticizing the maintainer for a decision so negligible it seems like satire.

I'm sensitive to the tactic of insulting people for pointing out inconvenient facts, namely that this action was taken - which got my accused of "projection" i.e. I am projecting my own childishness, based on zero evidence. Saying I'm "extremely sensitive" is another way of distracting from the point.

The decision was not negligible as far as I believe, but if you'd like to have a constructive discussion of that, rather than personal putdown, please go ahead.

The onus is on you to demonstrate why it’s not negligible, besides demonstrating your ability to take offense more readily than most.

Look, I’m not the person that insulted you, but I’m sorry this happened to you if it means you’ll reevaluate your perspective of this discussion.

Stating that you are sorry, while continuing with the "easily offended" spiel doesn't project sincerity.

Let me be clear - I don't agree with your perspective, either on how offended you think I am or should be, (or how relevant it is to this thread outside purposeful trolling, with personal attacks) or how negligible the naming issue is. The onus is on you to substantiate these judgements.

Sorry for the insincerity, genuinely.

A more level-headed version of what I was trying to communicate is that I agree that you're probably not as offended as I judged you to be by your replies in this thread. But if you're not as offended as I think you are, then why is this an issue at all - either regarding the replies you're getting in this thread or Kovid's communication that you linked earlier?

I just don't see why that mattered in the first place. It wasn't perfect communication, but it seemed like you were using this to make the point that Kovid's communication should indeed be at the forefront of the discussion of Calibre's development.

> why is this an issue at all

b/c I dislike unsubstantiated accusations of "projection", it feels like lazy point making of "no u".

wrt Kovid's communication - it wasn't imperfect communication on Kovid's part, his intent was clear I think. And I responded to the claim that Kovid's only "crime" was some other matter, but he was involved in this flame also.