Here's the thread about "VLC's terrible "Magnification/Zoom" user interface" from July 27, 2014.

I posted a detailed message describing exactly what the problems were (there were MANY), specific and precise step by step instructions detailing exactly how to reproduce them, with references to Fitt's Law on wikipedia to support my points about usability.

You eventually replied "If you did shorter posts, maybe people will read them..." to which I replied "if you did less arrogant responses to long posts, maybe people wouldn't give up on trying to help you." And then I gave up trying to help you. (Yet here we are, again! So why don't you give it another go, and acknowledge the problem, please?)

That's what I consider "brushing off", when you won't take the time to even read what I wrote, yet spent at least as much time arguing and telling me that you didn't read what I wrote and that I should do shorter posts, as it would have taken you to read what I wrote in the first place.

Do you not bother reading long detailed security bug reports too? Or only if they are very polite and complementary? If your skin is so thin that you deal with constructive input about security bugs the same way as you dealt with my report, then VLC users are in big trouble.

https://forum.videolan.org/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=103604&p=407...

>[...] The terrible things about the design of the VLC magnification user interface are as follows: [...]

dfuhrmann>Sorry, but instead writing your really long post, you would better do fill a short and precise enchanchment request at your bug tracker for this issue. Actually, I stopped reading in the middle.

https://forum.videolan.org/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=103604&p=407...

>Of course, I was planning on filing a lot of bugs.

>But of course I also want to discuss the bugs here FIRST, to give anybody who thinks so the chance to chime in that it's designed to work that way on purpose, or that they don't consider it a bug for some reason.

I gave a link to another thread where Jean-Baptiste Kempf brushed off another similar bug report, "hot key magnification. does it exist?" on Jun 12, 2012:

https://forum.videolan.org/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=101741&p=343...

A user described the problem, and Jean-Baptiste replied smugly but incorrectly with the single character "z", and the user replied "Thanks for the response, Jean-Baptiste, but you did NOT read what I wrote."

He was never able to get you to listen to what he was saying or take him seriously, and you never followed up on his clarification. He finally said "Please read my original question again. Maybe you, too, are confused by the nomenclature. Zoom ("z") is NOT the same as magnification.".

That's what I call rudely brushing off and ignoring valid bug reports. And it worries me that this well established pattern might apply to security bugs, too.

And here are two about the much more terrible infinite loop problem:

Here's the "Infinite loop on playlist" one from March 5 2012, in which the developer Rémi Denis-Courmont brushed off the report with "That's not really a bug. VLC is doing what you told it to... The obvious solution would be to stop the playlist whenever an error occurs. But that would probably cause even more frustrations..."

https://forum.videolan.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=98866&p=33285...

And here's the "Infinite loop on missing files" from October 23, 2013, where Jean-Baptiste Kempf himself brushes it off with "Known limitation."

https://forum.videolan.org/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=114668&p=388...

Two times that bug was reported on the discussion groups, and brushed off. Once by another developer. Once by you. Do you remember now?