Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: R0b0t1 <r030t1@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Moderator ruleset for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 03:55:43
Message-Id: CAAD4mYjY9W1=77xwFuhij2aiqPLcoXHU1cdHH_v3Uw+7A+Lyhw@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Moderator ruleset for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org by "Aaron W. Swenson"
1 On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Aaron W. Swenson <titanofold@g.o> wrote:
2 > According to Merriam-Webster:
3 >
4 > self-evident
5 > adjective | self-ev·i·dent | ˌself-ˈe-və-dənt , -ˌdent
6 > evident without proof or reasoning
7 >
8
9 The version I used is taken from http://dd.pangyre.org/s/self-evident.html.
10
11 > You have been a part of the conversations that devolved into the
12 > non-technical, and even started your own decidedly non-technical
13 > discussion on this list[1] where you’ve seen that rules for moderation,
14 > or at least defining the expectations of moderators and participants,
15 > would have been beneficial.
16 >
17
18 Yes, it was non-technical, but it was related to Gentoo and most
19 importantly the stability of my operating system, which is why I
20 bothered to comment. I want to stress I am not opposed to moderation,
21 but so far the reason why things are happening and the specific things
22 being proposed do not seem to be well justified.
23
24 If, like in the past, decisions will be enforced more or less
25 arbitrarily and opaquely, I can only see this causing more problems. I
26 suppose the problems may be quieter.
27
28 Cheers,
29 R0b0t1