| 1 |
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 09:04:39AM -0500, Jeffrey Gardner wrote: |
| 2 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 3 |
> Hash: SHA1 |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Jakub Moc wrote: |
| 6 |
> > So.... Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our |
| 7 |
> > brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this project any more. |
| 8 |
> > I'm therefore resigning from this project. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> It was recently said that if you had been the 20th or 30th person to get |
| 11 |
> sanctioned, you could have just relaxed and enjoyed the vacation time. |
| 12 |
> But since the CoC is fairly new, and you're the first one (that I can |
| 13 |
> remember) to get suspended, it stings more than it should. |
| 14 |
> Anyway, what I'm trying to say is don't take it so hard...it's not that |
| 15 |
> big a deal. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
Ok, I'm going to quote something I wrote on the -core mailing list that |
| 18 |
will hopefully help to clear up this misunderstanding about the decision |
| 19 |
being based on the new code of conduct. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
"Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned CoC at all since it seems to confuse a |
| 22 |
few people. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
We're not suspending jakub based on CoC but based on a long string of |
| 25 |
bad behaviour. That behaviour certainly violates the code of conduct in |
| 26 |
many cases but the suspension isn't based on CoC as such but rather the |
| 27 |
numerous devrel complaints and warnings he's already received." |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
In short, the suspension is based on repeated bad behaviour during a |
| 30 |
long period of time and despite warning him several times there's been |
| 31 |
no improvement in his behaviour. That's why we're calling for a timeout |
| 32 |
with this suspension and hoping that jakub will reconsider his |
| 33 |
behaviour. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Regards, |
| 36 |
Bryan Østergaard |
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives