| 1 |
On 2017-12-15 16:37, R0b0t1 wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hello, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Nils Freydank <holgersson@××××××.de> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Hello everyone, |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > with regards to the current mailing list (ML) split discussion, and one |
| 8 |
> > specific message deep down there by mgorny asked for someone providing |
| 9 |
> > moderator rules, I would like to propose the following ruleset for gentoo-dev |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > Right now the situation escalated in a way that forces to actually do |
| 12 |
> > something and I hope we can recreate an atmosphere where technical |
| 13 |
> > improvements can happen. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> To me, at least, this isn't self-evident. What specific actions make |
| 17 |
> you think an immediate response is necessary? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> self-evident |
| 20 |
> adj. Evident to one’s self and to nobody else. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Cheers, |
| 23 |
> R0b0t1 |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
According to Merriam-Webster: |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
self-evident |
| 29 |
adjective | self-ev·i·dent | ˌself-ˈe-və-dənt , -ˌdent |
| 30 |
evident without proof or reasoning |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
You have been a part of the conversations that devolved into the |
| 33 |
non-technical, and even started your own decidedly non-technical |
| 34 |
discussion on this list[1] where you’ve seen that rules for moderation, |
| 35 |
or at least defining the expectations of moderators and participants, |
| 36 |
would have been beneficial. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
[1]: <CAAD4mYjdb+BR__R7nQK1VQQwm3poc-jj20cw_jeoYWLAHD9rnA@××××××××××.com> |
Archives