Rather depressing re: Javalobby and JDJ

One of the saddest aspects of being involved on Javalobby in a discussion about JDJ is the bias shown publicly. JDJ suffers from being corporate, from not being biased towards various authors.

For example, I know of two people who are publicly fairly anti-JDJ (three, actually) who have, in private conversations, not shown the same bias at all. I understand that, really, but it's sad - because part of their claims is that JDJ is inauthentic. Isn't that a little bit like the pot calling the kettle black? Wouldn't a claim concerning authenticity need to be made by someone who's being authentic?

At the very least, I'm biased in favor of JDJ, without being starry-eyed over how perfect it is. I know there are "issues," and I know that JDJ has some fine-tuning to undergo (and some gross tunings, as well). Heck, that's why I brought up the topic on Javalobby in the first place. These people - and I won't mention their names - haven't shown themselves to be who they are, and that's just sad.

On the other hand, there've been a few detractors who've at least been honest about it. In private conversations with them, they're not saying stuff like, "I'm blasting you in public, but I don't actually feel that strongly about it." That's easier to work with; at least I have some idea of the issues I'm dealing with in those cases, and we have the basis for communication.

There's nothing like trying to address a specific complaint only to have the complainer say, "I don't really feel that way, I'm only saying it for the masses." (And that's a paraphrase, folks.)