1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
3 |
|
4 |
forwarding at Peters request... |
5 |
|
6 |
- -------- Original Message -------- |
7 |
|
8 |
Mike, I tried to post this, but got an error message that the |
9 |
list is unidirectional! Don't know what that's about. Maybe |
10 |
I need to subscribe. Nonetheless, i wanted to share these thoughts |
11 |
with you. You're welcome to post it on my behalf. I would appreciate |
12 |
if you would xxx out my email though. |
13 |
|
14 |
Subject: Re: RFC: etiquette enforcment |
15 |
From: Peter <pete4abw@localhost> |
16 |
Newsgroups: gmane.linux.gentoo.devrel |
17 |
Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 16:22:07 -0400 |
18 |
|
19 |
On Thu, 18 May 2006 14:41:03 -0500, Mike Doty wrote: |
20 |
|
21 |
snip... |
22 |
|
23 |
> creation of a etiquette enforcement group. This group should be a |
24 |
> subproject of devrel, but should not be made up of devrel members. I |
25 |
> say this because the actions and powers of this group need to be |
26 |
> separated from devrel. |
27 |
|
28 |
While I am surely against flamewars on MLs, the idea of a thought police |
29 |
is disturbing. The main problem with some of the out of hand threads is |
30 |
twofold. One, I think some topics are brought up intentionally to provoke |
31 |
a reaction. Then, when others react, it goes out of control like a chain |
32 |
reaction gone critical. |
33 |
|
34 |
I think from a bureaucratic pov, having another layer of management just |
35 |
makes for more managers and less action. While I cannot speak for others, |
36 |
I know who the respected people are, and who the dolts are. And, I would |
37 |
have no problem with a respected person writing to someone off list and |
38 |
telling them to STFU. |
39 |
|
40 |
I am not in favor of the idea of banning a user from a mailing list |
41 |
- --unless it's a spammer. After all, you do not want to get the reputation |
42 |
of being a distro that stifles discussion. |
43 |
|
44 |
snip... |
45 |
|
46 |
> <troll> clueless: you moron! ebuilds can't install to /usr/local, go |
47 |
> jump off a bridge! |
48 |
> <enforcer> troll: if you can't say something constructive, then please |
49 |
> don't say anything. |
50 |
> .... |
51 |
|
52 |
IRC is much easier to deal with since it's real time and interactive. |
53 |
Any OP can participate |
54 |
snip... |
55 |
|
56 |
> So, these are my thoughts. there is still a lot to be worked out if we |
57 |
> decide that this is the best approach. |
58 |
> |
59 |
> All comments are welcome, and if you want to troll, direct it to your |
60 |
> nearest brick wall. |
61 |
> |
62 |
|
63 |
I think the ML situation is more complex. Some topics start off as a |
64 |
simple technical matter or proposal. They then degenerate into personal |
65 |
flamefests. In these cases, sometimes a matter is brought up simply to |
66 |
incite. Other times, it grows from stubbornness on both sides. And, of |
67 |
course, the harder one pushes one way, the harder the opponent will push |
68 |
back. |
69 |
|
70 |
The paludis example on gentoo-dev is such an example. I do not know all of |
71 |
the personalities involved, but I am SURE that a lot of what's being |
72 |
written is because of personal relationships (and lack thereof). |
73 |
Bennett/McCreesh propose something, their detractors fight it. And, |
74 |
everything spirals downhill from there. |
75 |
|
76 |
Now, you can't rightly ban someone for making a proposal. And, you can't |
77 |
ban someone for arguing against it. HOWEVER, what CAN be done is for a dev |
78 |
or council member to post a message outside the thread asking the |
79 |
participants to STFU! Any new user or list visitor who happens on that |
80 |
thread will not be able to make any sense of it, since so many responses |
81 |
are so narrowly focused or intensely personal. Lengthy threads like this |
82 |
are more a problem than their contents. Interested users can't possibly |
83 |
follow the discourse. |
84 |
|
85 |
Nonetheless, as a user who has had occasional runins with others on the |
86 |
ML, I appreciate the effort here. However, I think to write policy to |
87 |
enforce these things is to discourage free speech. And, as much as I |
88 |
personally disagree with certain people, they have as much as right to |
89 |
post as you or I do. |
90 |
|
91 |
I do believe that a common sense approach to this can resolve a lot of the |
92 |
problems. OPs on IRC can chime in and kick a troll easily. And, a |
93 |
respected dev or council member can email a user off list privately and |
94 |
tell them to knock it off, or post publicly to the list to end a thread. |
95 |
|
96 |
The last thing you want is for some malcontent to shout CENSORSHIP! |
97 |
- -- |
98 |
Peter |
99 |
|
100 |
- -- |
101 |
======================================================= |
102 |
Mike Doty kingtaco@g.o |
103 |
Gentoo/AMD64 Strategic Lead PGP Key: 0xA797C7A7 |
104 |
Gentoo Developer Relations |
105 |
===GPG Fingerprint=== |
106 |
0094 7F06 913E 78D6 F1BB 06BA D0AD D125 A797 C7A7 |
107 |
======================================================= |
108 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
109 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) |
110 |
|
111 |
iD8DBQFEbOGx0K3RJaeXx6cRAh5QAKC0LHWTZlgEatkUVlfkuNwTRs9cqgCfePbM |
112 |
PoVIzYVcjZHlE1qIx3keXmY= |
113 |
=XjN8 |
114 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |