Link Details

Who is 'We'? Who is 'They'?

Ok, so you're happy with monolithic all controlling frameworks. It's hardly a reason to vote me down you jerk.

You're seriously crying and calling people names because you got voted down on dzone?

I called the guy a jerk because he down voted the article asking who is we and who is they, which was answered in the very first two sentences. And this is what it has turned into!

He's a jerk because he obviously didn't read the next two sentences and instead just down voted the article based entirely on the title, which does in fact make him a jerk. The fact that you and others take his side, and start a flame war with (15+ down votes and more than 45 comments), makes you far worse.

Now I likely have wasted a ton of work on projects that are now sour with everyone, and I take that very seriously!

I also notice complaints about me plugging my project. ALMOST EVERY ARTICLE ON DZONE IS SOMEONE PLUGGING THEIR PROJECT IN SOME WAY OR ANOTHER. We’re all trying to get exposure.

I'm an open-source developer and I have received nothing in the way of support from the so called open-source "community". I write what should have been two simple articles and this is what I get! I defend myself and my article, and I get flamed and both my articles get voted down. And I’m called all kinds of things, and get emails to my business account. The people down voting me say they are down voting because I tried to defend myself and should simply take it. And if you look at the down voters you will see that many of them are involved with other web frameworks.

You all seem to treat down votes as if they are nothing, but in fact, as can be seen, they can make or break your project. They should be taken very seriously, and I do take them very personally. I’m not sensitive; I am trying to defend my work.

Furthermore, I am extremely offended that framework developers from other competing projects would behave in this manner.

Nobody is going to ignore jWebApp because you over-reacted on dzone. If anything it'll get more attention, and maybe somebody will think it's perfect for their needs.

You simply haven't been called "all sorts of things", and you haven't been flamed. People have said you're over-reacting, which you are. I can't speak for others and why they downvoted--I downvoted because I didn't like the article. I don't like jWebApp because it doesn't suit my needs. *Both of those things are okay.*

Dave, the fact is I'm also getting emails, so like you love to say you don't actually know what I am dealing with and/or thinking. But, I will say to you, this is unforgivable!

Not liking your article or your framework is unforgiveable? That's just bizarre. You're giving my opinion far, far too much weight.

It's not your opinion, it the fact that most of the comments come from you. What's bizarre is someone following a flame war so intently. It's understandable that I would since they are my articles and projects, but you're just a freak!

Am I the only person following this "flame war"? No, you are too. "Defending" your framework against... not sure what. Did you even *read* my submission where I explain in minor detail why your framework doesn't work for me, and say that it might be great for some applications or developers?

So if it's not my *opinion* that's "unforgiveable", it's what, that I take what you say seriously? I've given you *so* many opportunities to stop digging yourself even further into the hole. After I saw that you wigged out a year ago I should have understood it doesn't really matter what anybody says.

Again, I'm sorry you're so offended I didn't like your article and that your framework doesn't work for me. If you think I've done anything actionable, take me to court, otherwise give it a rest.

We are web application developers, and they are web framework developers, just as the second sentence explains! Hardly a good reason to vote this down.

I voted it down because (a) it's really not that great of an article, while I agree with the premise, (b) because you called someone a jerk because they voted down the article, and (c) jWebApp doesn't seem much simpler than several Java web frameworks I use, and it uses custom tags, which the article says is bad, so I got confused.

So I guess I'm a jerk too. But at least I don't go around making assumptions about how jerky other people are, magically reading their minds so I know why they voted down an article, or pissing on myself because somebody votes me down on a public website.

Second that.

The tags are framework independent and optional, but are obviously needed to repopulate the form if validation fails. And yes you're a jerk too. The fact is this is one of the biggest problems I see with dzone, you get voted down arbitrarily by anyone for the slightest of reasons.

You must be new to the internet.

News flash: I'm not a jerk because I don't like your article or your framework. You may want to consider learning to deal with disagreement in some way other than lashing out.

Not at all, just tired of the childish anti-social behavior.

It's neither childish nor anti-social to not like an article.

It *is* childish and anti-social to call someone a jerk because they didn't like your article, regardless of the reason they didn't like it (which you don't even know).

This is ridiculous, I called him a jerk for arbitrarily voting down my article when he didn't even read or comprehend the second sentence. You’re a jerk for starting this flame war over something you didn’t even notice.

Ah, so now you now *my* motivations too. And this isn't a flame war--this is me repeatedly telling you that (a) you don't know why s/he voted down your article and (b) YOU SHOULDN'T CARE. (And your retaliatory vote-downs don't really bolster your case.)

Your motivations are to be a jerk. The original flame was:

Who is 'We'? Who is 'They'?

Which was answered in the second sentence following the title. So, I do know why s/he voted down my article

Says the person who voted down Motion Control's article because s/he voted down yours. So you're not only a jerk, you're a hypocritical jerk that can't live up to his own standards. Sweet.

That's right! If you're going to arbitrarily vote my articles down, I will go and do the same to all yours. Now, little boy, how much longer do you want to keep this up?

You really don't see either bit of hypocrisy in that comment, do you. Fascinating.

It's not hypocrisy! If you hit me, I'm going to hit you back!

No no. See, you called somebody a jerk because they "arbitrarily" voted down your article. So you went and voted down *several* of their articles in retaliation (needless escalation). That's *childish*. Then you called *me* a "little boy" because you're being childish and I called you on it. You also called me a jerk because I didn't like your article (or your reaction) even after I gave you article-related reasons why I voted it down.

Then you said that I didn't have the balls or ability to write an article and I just go around criticizing others--which doesn't make any sense, because you don't know anything about the status of my balls, my ability to write an article, or how often I go around criticizing others--you know only that I haven't put any articles on dzone and that I criticized *yours*. That's *also* a childish reaction, and ignorant (in the technical sense of the word) to boot.

It's okay for people not to like your articles or your framework. It's even okay for people not to like either based on reasons you consider arbitrary, or even wrong. Get over it. That's what life in the public spotlight is like--if you're going to survive that world then you may want to consider adjusting your approach to people "arbitrarily" (or not) rejecting you.

Personally I'd be more concerned about people rejecting me non-arbitrarily than arbitrarily--if someone has a *reason* for dismissing something I say then I can at least *examine* that reason, potentially adjust my approach, possibly educate them further, and so on.

See, I've been programming for 30 years, professionally for 20, web apps for 10, writing and teaching for the same, wrote a book (out in January--feel free to arbitrarily reject and/or criticize it), and am active in the development and maintenance of several web frameworks. I may very well be a jerk (although most would disagree with your characterization), but I'm *not* a jerk *because* I didn't like the article or the framework.

'Nuff said, you may have the last word. If you want to have a *rational* discussion about the article, the framework, or general development stuff, feel free to contact me off-dzone, I'm not terribly difficult to find.

You also made a mountain out of a mole hill and clearly have anger management issues. I am only defending my articles. I will deffinitely keep an eye on you and your work. Do you have any articles or websites you would like to point us to?

*sigh*

*I* made a mountain out of a molehill? No no. *We* made a mountain out of a molehill.

I'd have to be angry for your anger management comment to make any sense--if anybody is angry here it's you. I just think you're being even more childish than the person you called childish.

No, I don't; I don't have the balls or ability, remember?

(See how other people keep voting the article down? Now--do you think that's because of the article, or because of your reaction to criticism, both "arbitrary" and not? Could it be both? This is a rhetorical question, you're simply going to have to continue this without me.)

So you're a struts 2 contributor. A competing framework, is this your motivation? It amuses me that most of the down votes I get are from competing projects.

I use competitors to S2 on a daily basis (and some that aren't competitors in a strict sense), so you'll have to come up with a better reason than that, I'm afraid.

(And if you'll recall I said I agree with the premise of your article, I just didn't like the article itself, or the framework it advocates.)

Let me amend that statement; I use *and advocate for* S2 competitors (and other frameworks that aren't technically competitors). In other words, being a contributor to a given project doesn't mean that one puts on technical blinders and is no longer capable of making decisions based on technology or that it takes other frameworks out of consideration--it most certainly doesn't. In fact, a reasonable technical person would take (rational) criticisms of a framework to heart and address them in some way.

I voted you down because you wrote an article entitled "We Need Less, But They Keep Adding More" and then proceed to plug your own framework. The fact that you've carried on like an 4 year old at the other commenters just made it that much easier to click the down button.

Those happen to be the exact reasons I just voted you down :)

Yes, and all your posted articles are very impressive as well.

Weird, I don't think I've posted any articles on dzone.

Oh, I see what you did there! You think that matters, and can't manage to get all your little jabs in the five-minute edit window.

You actually *are* a jerk, or at least are making the effort to appear as one--all because somebody didn't like your article.

Grow up.

My point exactly. You criticize other's articles, but don't have the balls or ability to write your own.

Ah, okay. I knew it had to be something like that.

I happen to know Dave, and have to tell you he is a nice guy. He also did all the work himself (jPersist, jWebApp, jwaBlogger, websites, documentation, etc.) And I find myself ashamed to be involved with this community, after the shabby way he was treated.

One guy votes down his article based entirely on the title which is explained on the very same page in the first two sentences and it turns into a shoot Dave contest. You people disgust me!

This is the way it happened! The very first down vote and comment was "who is we and who is they". Now asking the question is perfectly fine, and I would have provided the second sentence below the title as an answer. But, instead he votes the article down; and it had to be based entirely on the title, because clearly reading the article would have left him knowing who we and they are. So yes I did get mad (not allowed on DZone), because he voted the article down entirely based on the title. He didn't read the article and most of the others didn't either. It was like a snowball rolling downhill, one guy sees a down vote and the rest follow. Not one person commenting and voting knew a thing about jWebApp, but they made all kinds of assumptions.

This is my work, obviously I will defend it and get mad when appropriate.

Furthermore, the majority of the down voters and commenters work on competing frameworks! That's just not right! So DZone will go the way of Usenet, where everyone just flames everyone.

This may be the most commented article on dzone to date

*lol* That's probably true; I take partial responsibility for the noise--sorry.

agreeeeeeeeeeeeeed !:D

Thank you all! You've shown me what the open-source community and netizenship is all about.

You should have left the original "fuck off" you had at the end, it was much more entertaining.

I actually think the author is on to something. It's a full time job just to follow the Java web framework ecosystem where everyone seems to make up their own. If I were an employer, I'd prefer one "good enough" KISS solution since it would make sure the energy was spend on the solutions rather than the means to solutions.

First, I don't support this type of keeping conversation going neither by article's author nor by his opponents. When I was only one or two months old on DZone, I had this type of "dialog" with one guy blindly advocating M$ technologies and spitting on free/open alternatives. He even called latter "communism" and named them "dangerous to business" :-)) . I haven't seen him anymore here. Now I know it was childish just to start talking to that person, and I'm ashamed of doing that.
Second, I don't see anything in the article in question that explain so much down votes. Not a "really not that great of an article" (not great? so what? it's good and it's enough), but it has a point and definitely enumerates what sometimes lacks in today's web frameworks. My vote is +1.

Voted Down. I had a quick look at some of the jWebApp examples.

Here is the AJAX example: http://www.jwebapp.org/mainView.jwa?e=jwebapp_ajax

Observations:

- additional Servlet configuration needed
- developer needs to know JSON and embed it into a JSP
- developer needs to know JavaScript and embed it into a JSP
- developer needs to understand HTML DOM and manipulate it from JavaScript
- developer needs to know how to use the function "getHttpRequest"

And here is the "Forms" example: http://www.jwebapp.org/mainView.jwa?e=jwebapp_forms

- developer needs to know the tags e.g. jwa:text, jwa:password, jwa:check, jwa:radio etc. and how to use them (attributes etc.)

So as an earlier commenter pointed out, the article says "I should not have to use any framework specific embedded code or tags" - but this does not seem to be the case with jWebApp.

This is all just so ridiculous!

- Oh yes, JSON is so hard. And, of course there are no JSON libs out there, so I must build it in.
- There are no examples of embedding JavaScript in the JSP (hope your not developing webapps)
- I don't want my framework doing any HTML/DOM/JavaScript, because I am then dependent on what the framework supports and can't take advantage of all the JavaScript frameworks and tools that are out there like Dojo and jQuery.
- The developer does not need to use getHttpRequest(), it is just an AJAX example of using HTTP from within Java and has nothing to do with the framework. I would expect even a beginner to recognize this.

As I also mentioned earlier the jwa tags are optional. However, if you submit a plain HTML form to a server of any kind and it is rejected for validation reasons, that the form will be empty and all the data the user entered will be gone, unless your repopulate them yourself.

The jwa tag files are a framework independent helper that simply repopulate the form.

And, by the way, it is just an example! One of the features of the "crappy" framework is the fact that you can do things the way you want to do them. The "crappy" framework doesn't force anything on you. It's a minimalist framework! Which is something that should be easy to see.

You're the *only* person here calling it "crappy". You do realize that, right? I mean, seriously--do you have a persecution complex? I'm *begging* you to consider reacting to comments and criticism much, *much* less personally.

- deleted -

This is amazing!

It all starts with a guy who couldn’t read the first two sentences to figure out that the title was referring to web developers and web framework developers. I defend myself and article and I’m called the asshole. And I get flamed and both my articles get voted down. And I’m called all kinds of things, and get email to my business account. The people down voting me say they are down voting because I tried to defend myself, but that they mostly agree with the articles. And if you look at the down voters you will see that many of them are involved with other web frameworks.

You all seem to treat down votes as if they are nothing, but in fact, as can be seen, they can make or break your project. They should be taken very seriously, and I do take them very personally. I’m not sensitive, I am trying to defend my work.

You were never called an asshole, AFAICT. For my own part, I initially expressed surprise that you called someone a jerk for downvoting your article, then explained why I downvoted it myself (for which I was *also* called a jerk), and explained even *further* in my own submission.

It's possible to "defend your work" without name-calling, without thinking the world is out to get you, and without assuming that the only reason it was downvoted was because people are involved with other frameworks. You didn't really do you, or your framework, any favors by flying off the handle, of course, but that's a different issue.

It's *okay* that people didn't like the article. It's even okay if they don't like jWebApp. It's actually even okay if they don't like it for reasons you consider arbitrary, although I agree with you that it's not terribly polite--but that's life sometimes. I hope we can put this behind us, and just agree to disagree.

(*I* don't, by the way, think you're an asshole, I just think you went off the deep end and completely over-reacted, but it happens; we've all been there.)

I would point out that Dave Newton, who is the contributor of most of these comments, is a Struts developer. He is also a struts project contributor and has written one or more books on Struts.

If I were the struts guys, I would not want one of my members out there starting wars. If I were his publisher, I also would not want him out there starting wars.

I find it very disturbing that a framework developer from another project would behave in this manner.

Dude, seriously: re-read the threads. Right now it's like you're in an alternate reality or something. You called people "jerks" because they didn't like your article and downvoted it. Hell, I even said I *agreed* with the premise of the article--I simply didn't like the article, and I provided some reasons why.

Holy crap. There's nothing else to say; you've totally lost me.

Who out there would follow this, as you have, for two days? You respond within seconds to every comment. I called the guy a jerk because he down voted the article asking who is we and who is they, which was answered in the very first two sentences.

And this is what it has turned into! He's a jerk because he obviously didn't read the next two sentences and instead just down voted the article. I would assume he down voted based entirely on the title, which does in fact make him a jerk. The fact that you and others take his side, and start a flame war, makes you far worse.

Now I likely have wasted a ton of work on projects that are now sour with everyone, and I will take that very seriously!

I'm sick, and it's on auto-notify. I guess you'll just have to deal with somebody taking you seriously.

How did *I* start a flame war? By thinking you way, *way* over-reacted?! I'd have to *flame you* to start a flame war. Right now you're so wrapped up in what you *believe* is happening you've completely stopped paying attention to what's really going on here.

For gosh sakes, stop thinking everybody is out to get you and thinks jWebApp sucks. As I said in my submission I'm sure it's great for some people--but not for me, and I've provided reasons why. I simply didn't like the article--*relax*.

I also notice complaints about me plugging my project. Almost every article on DZone is someone plugging their project in some way or another.

I'm an open-source developer and I have received nothing in the way of support from the open-source "community". I write what should have been two simple articles and this is what I get!

relax

Voted down because the article contradicts itself (it seems you are actually part of that "they", not "we") and for this flamewar.

Jeez Dave, just stop hitting reply. It's obvious this guy won't stop

Yeah; I've finished--I hadn't realized originally much the same thing happened a year ago, and the further dissociation between what I was saying and what was being heard, the more depressing it got. Ah well.

Damn, I hit reply again :(

(from the article)
>I believe this is overkill and I should not have to develop any portion of the controller, for any reason.

Are you referring to JSF, where the framework provides the controller and you indeed don't have to develop any portion of it? (just curious)