Gentoo Archives: gentoo-devrel

From: Jon Portnoy <avenj@g.o>
To: gentoo-devrel@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-devrel] devrel meeting etc
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 02:55:24
Message-Id: 20050907025517.GA32388@cerberus.oppresses.us
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-devrel] devrel meeting etc by Olivier Fisette
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 10:30:20PM -0400, Olivier Fisette wrote:
> > You now suggest going back (in some ways) to how things were done > before, even though devrel was blamed for the way the last > incident was handled, and even though the separation of devrel > in two groups was suggested to help avoiding abuse and lack of > transparency.
There's never been any abuse and transparency is irrelevant to separating the two. Unfortunately when certain individual(s) can't get away with flat out insulting other individuals it somehow turns into "devrel is abusive." Sorry, I don't buy it. When pressed for a depthful example of an incident of devrel being "abusive" nobody's come up with anything yet and frankly it sucks that devrel took the Ciaran vs. devrel popularity contest to heart enough to totally ruin devrel as an effective problem resolution body. -- Jon Portnoy avenj/irc.freenode.net -- gentoo-devrel@g.o mailing list