| 1 |
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 00:34:33 +0000 (UTC) |
| 3 |
> Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> While it pains me to say this, unfortunately it looks like we have |
| 6 |
>> another "toxic person" situation to deal with, with all the |
| 7 |
>> implications that come with it. Maybe it's time to deal with it. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Toxic wars have casualties; in one of the sides, or in both of them. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> IOTW; you're already dealing with it, you can only change the outcome. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Can you be clear as to what you're recommending? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Are you suggesting that instead of trying to mediate between people |
| 17 |
who don't get a long, it would be better to just pick one or the other |
| 18 |
as the winner and boot the other out? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
One of the challenges here is that if we were talking about just one |
| 21 |
productive person who tended to drive everybody away that would be one |
| 22 |
thing. The problem is that we have a lot of productive people who |
| 23 |
have different sorts of personality quirks. They range from blowing |
| 24 |
up in public, to constant passive-aggression, to just silently doing |
| 25 |
their own thing completely ignoring any input whatsoever. I'm sure I |
| 26 |
missed a few, like writing excessively-long emails. :) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I guess one of the advantages of a model where devs turn into |
| 29 |
reviewers instead of authors is that you can prioritize people skills |
| 30 |
since their main role isn't to actually write the code so much as to |
| 31 |
coordinate things. However, this assumes that people would still |
| 32 |
contribute in such a model. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Rich |
Archives