1. https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/legalize-and-regul...
2. https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/abolish-tsa-and-us...
People need to think things through sometimes.
How about the fact he is contributing and trying to make the government better and more open instead of whinging like an immature, sanctimonious dick.
I have 100x more respect for people that at least try.
Otherwise it is pretty mindless to attack the programmers for that.
So I don't know what your argument is. But I assure you I do have 100x more respect for someone who does SOMETHING in the right direction as opposed to do someone who just whinges.
Give them the benefit of the doubt that maybe, just maybe, they have good intentions; clone the repo and and say, "Thank you".
OK, I'll bite. Who is now aware of the issue who wasn't previously?
The majority of HN readers and GH users would immediately close issues / pull requests like this and be bitter about it. I don't understand why there is a double standard being applied here.
We should also note that making this software open (which is actually pretty badly designed, actually looking at it) is a similar farce. The objective they claim, for doing so, is somehow related to an open government. That's like claiming open-sourcing the software you use to send electronic messages back and forth is making your actual communications with said software "open." Nonsense.
Anyway, rejecting pull requests with patronizing responses is hardly uncommon on Github.
http://rlv.zcache.com/cute_mustache_octopus_sticker-p2177152...
2008: Rag tag, understaffed, throw them into the deep end working on rewarding projects that made small strides toward advancing the infrastructure of technology in politics and bring widespread public attention that gave hope for burgeoning markets and a space for competition. A new frontier! Technological solutions for campaigns and the American people!
2012: Best and the brightest fighting to uphold the principles, ideals, and best practices of all veins of the technology industry but they only actually let them do their jobs in order to give lip service to what got those young talented people so excited and what got them there in the first place, and they only let them do it if there's a blatantly obvious way to save face if it backfires, or in a subtly insulting way.
Its a beat down for uppity youngsters who thought they might be able to, I don't know, start a business, or run for office, or provide solutions in the political realm. Technology in politics is a victim of its own success. Politicos don't see technology as way to connect with people and do their jobs better. They see it as stealing their thunder because they don't know how to control it yet. They don't understand the rules so everyone, down to the president himself seems to be spending more time playing whack-a-potential-political-zuck than doing their own job. The only thing we can hope that that eventually they'll be spending so much time preventing technology workers in politics from doing their job that they won't have enough time to screw over voters as much.
It looks like we're at or just barely over the 50% mark in favor of legalizing marijuana here in Washington, but there's a lot of moneyed interests (e.g. medical marijuana sellers) who are doing their best to kill the initiative.
Please note that I don't smoke pot. I might if it's legalized in the state, but choose not to because, among other reasons, it helps fund narco-terrorism.
People who do not use the website should be totally ignored, regardless of their votes in the actual election.
Otherwise, the President is ignoring petitions and hates Democracy.
Link: http://www.usatoday.com/yourlife/health/medical/pediatrics/2...
However, repeated studies and surveys show that it is easier for teens to get certain drugs, including pot, than it is for them to get cigarettes or alcohol. This make sense considering someone mandated by law to check for id is selling it to them, oppose to another teen selling them unchecked, non taxed pot without doing so.
Link: http://blog.norml.org/2009/08/28/study-says-its-easier-for-t...
While this thread may be about the white house's code base, hear this; don't put your github account near this. You may think it could be harmless, but they could be collecting your account names. After all we are all just dangerous computer hackers!
Link: http://www.channel4.com/news/hackers-are-more-dangerous-than...
Disclaimer: Just my opinion.
0.024% of the US signed that one, and it wasn't ignored. A response was given. Not liking the response isn't the same as it being ignored.
You also skipped over the part where the response given was bullshit boilerplate and amounted to ignoring it.
At that point, why have petitions at all? It's just handwaving.
"the response given was bullshit boilerplate"
Well I guess he assumed correctly.
If you really want petitions, start a real petition. The website is for something much more informal and you shouldn't get depressed just because 4chan isn't setting policy now.
And the response largely ignored the thrust of the petition. I.e. that the side effects of prohibition are worse than the effects of the substance.
All in all, the release of this code was probably for two reasons. 1) The developers liked what they built for the government, and felt that people should be able to use/learn from it. 2) Releasing the code with the readme it has shines a good light on Obama and helps his reelection efforts.
You just didn't like the answer. At least be intellectually honest.