Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Chrissy Fullam <musikc@g.o>
To: 'Gentoo Developers' <gentoo-dev@l.g.o>
Subject: RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: Item for 10 Jan 2008 Council meeting
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 21:12:33
Message-Id: 28CD260DF8914E95B5776F9B8225C926@draco2
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Item for 10 Jan 2008 Council meeting by Ferris McCormick
1 > > > Ferris McCormick wrote:
2 > > > they get to devrel because you ensured there would be no one to
3 > > > catch them --- you are the one who wanted to kill off the
4 > > > proctors, after all.
5 > >
6 > > Chris Gianelloni wrote:
7 > > ...and the finger-pointing starts... Bravo!
8 >
9 > Ferris McCormick wrote:
10 > To the extent you see this as a personal attack, I apologize.
11 > I never intended it as such. I was only recalling your email
12 > from 5 June
13
14 Fmccor, your comment about wolf 'being the one who wanted to kill off the
15 proctors' really served no purpose to the point; that being that the
16 proctors are no more and your personal curiosity as to how the CoC should
17 now be enforced. Adding no benefit to the point makes your comments useless
18 information. Your wording ('you ensured' and 'you are the one') only
19 furthers to make it useless information and appear very personal. 'You'
20 versus 'council' for example. You may honestly not intend it as such but
21 please be aware that it is easily interpreted that way when a simple change
22 of wording might have avoided this.
23
24 Wolf31o2 is not the council member who called to vote to disband the
25 proctors, and he is only one of five council members who voted to disband
26 the proctors. I myself had private conversations with council members OTHER
27 than wolf31o2 who had expressed the desire to drop the proctor project. The
28 combination of those things justifies me simply stating that your statement
29 is incorrect. Sure he sent that lovely email that you provided us all;
30 doesn't mean much though as he's not the only one who said those things. He
31 took a stance, as a council member should do, I mean isnt that why we have
32 council? And he is one person who can contribute but not solely rule, isnt
33 that why we have several council members instead of just one person? Quit
34 giving him 'credit' for the entire thing.
35
36 > Ferris McCormick wrote:
37 > As for filing a devrel complaint, do so if you must. But as
38 > you know, policy strongly suggests you should talk to me
39 > first so we can figure out where the miscommunication is. We
40 > also might discuss why you chose to hang an attack on devrel
41 > onto my rather innocuous musings.
42
43 You have a negative history with wolf31o2, and the details of which quite
44 frankly should be kept off this mailing list. His negative experiences
45 throughout all of 2007 with Conflict Resolution and consequently Developer
46 Relations justify any of your alleged 'attacks on devrel.' Let's take this
47 discussion elsewhere.
48 And a final note, you have had to justify your 'innocuous musings' a few
49 times recently, on this list and other Gentoo lists. Perhaps that could be a
50 sign that you should mull over and validate those musings yourself before
51 throwing them at the rest of us. Might cause fewer 'misunderstandings' with
52 regards to your statements.
53
54 Kind regards,
55 Christina Fullam
56 Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations
57
58
59 --
60 gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Item for 10 Jan 2008 Council meeting Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o>