Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: R0b0t1 <r030t1@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: gentoo-project <gentoo-project@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Splitting developer-oriented and expert user mailing lists
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2017 07:42:09
Message-Id: CAAD4mYiKqkM3wmTmKFdGAaFSvXf0BB99M5975gixsfTGwcgWQQ@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Splitting developer-oriented and expert user mailing lists by "Michał Górny"
1 On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
2 > W dniu nie, 03.12.2017 o godzinie 23∶59 -0600, użytkownik R0b0t1
3 > napisał:
4 >> As noted, there is one: analyzing the actions of those who are being
5 >> "attacked" to see why people are bothering to do it in the first
6 >> place. I sincerely doubt the offensive parties are doing what they are
7 >> doing without cause.
8 >
9 > Most of the affected developers are perfectly aware of the purpose of
10 > those attacks. If there was anything to be done to resolve the situation
11 > peacefully, we'd have done it long time ago. However, we can't and are
12 > not going to yield to people's unfounded demands based purely
13 > on the pressure inflicted by their misbehavior.
14 >
15
16 You are presupposing they are attacks. If they are public, and on
17 gentoo-dev, then why would you consider them attacks? Are you the only
18 person who acts with reason or purpose? How do you determine someone
19 else is not acting with those things?
20
21 > I believe this is as far as I can answer you. Going beyond that goes
22 > into public judgment of private issues which is unacceptable on this
23 > mailing list.
24 >
25
26 You have now made the issue public by asking that the information be
27 acted on. If you can not present it publicly, then do not ask anyone
28 to act on it, and do not hold people to decisions or outcomes made
29 using the information.
30
31 >> But no, the Gentoo developers are always above reproach.
32 >
33 > This remark is highly inappropriate.
34 >
35
36 Multiple times I have had polite requests for some explanation of
37 actions be ignored. In a few of them I can cite behavior that
38 contradicts itself. What conclusion is left to me save that certain
39 developers revel in being petty tyrants?
40
41 >> > I'm sorry but the purpose of this thread is not to convince you that
42 >> > the problems exist. If you haven't experienced them already, then it
43 >> > would be polite of you to either accept them as a fact, or do some
44 >> > research yourself.
45 >> >
46 >>
47 >> Your job is not to convince me, personally, but the future reader of
48 >> this list. If you have given up on doing so then you have admitted
49 >> that you do not want to be held accountable for your actions because
50 >> you do not feel you need to explain why you are doing what you are
51 >> doing.
52 >
53 > It is quite ironic that you worry about a 'future reader' needing to be
54 > convinced in this past post (presuming you have some infinite knowledge
55 > of what kind of details would a 'future reader' consider satisfying)
56 > and at the same time you clearly reject to search for any past posts
57 > on the topic.
58 >
59
60 Most people consider evidence and fact-based reasoning satisfying. You
61 can dispute this if you wish, but I'm not sure how far you will be
62 able to take it.
63
64 > Also, I should point out that you don't get to tell me what my job is.
65 > If you believe this thread should contain such data, please collect it
66 > yourself in your own time and include it in a reply. However, I should
67 > point out that you should respect all the rules we're talking about.
68 > I'd rather spend the time doing something that is of much greater
69 > importance of Gentoo users than some potential decision that will
70 > probably no longer be remembered in 12 months, except in snarky
71 > comments.
72 >
73
74 If you do not want to convince people you are right, eventually you
75 will have to accept a complete lack of credibility.
76
77 I do not have such information and now I have learned you are actively
78 keeping it from me and from everyone else who may be trying to form an
79 opinion on this matter.
80
81 >> > I understand that you might want to know things. However, it is
82 >> > generally impolite if someone 'comes late to the party' and starts
83 >> > shouting questions that the existing participants know answers to
84 >> > already. This is distorting to the conversation at hand.
85 >> >
86 >>
87 >> I am not shouting. I am politely, but pointedly, asking questions that
88 >> you ostensibly should already have the answer to. If you do not have
89 >> the answer, then I feel it is clear to future readers of the list that
90 >> you are making decisions for nonsensical reasons.
91 >
92 > I should point out that your personal attacks are also unacceptable.
93 > If you disagree with the proposal, then please focus on discussing facts
94 > and not trying to prove your opponent's incompetence.
95 >
96
97 I regret that you see it as a personal attack, but I am simply trying
98 to tell you how I expect most people will view the situation. You are
99 asserting you are right with no evidence. No one has any reason to
100 believe you.
101
102 >> > People's private issues are not topic of this mailing list. It is
103 >> > generally impolite and unprofessional to discuss them publicly. Please
104 >> > don't do that.
105 >> >
106 >>
107 >> If the messages are being posted to gentoo-dev then I don't see why
108 >> you consider the issue private. At least one party intends it to be
109 >> public, probably because it's not a personal attack and is related to
110 >> Gentoo.
111 >
112 > One side being unprofessional does not excuse the other from being so.
113 > It only causes very unfair 'community judgment' where community judges
114 > based on abusive facts of one side where the other side is unable to
115 > provide counter-arguments without violating the privacy rules.
116 >
117
118 "Unfair community judgement" is using secret evidence to dictate your actions.
119
120 Respectfully,
121 R0b0t1