Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Burden of proof

[Christopher Díaz Riveros]

El lun, 02-04-2018 a las 14:11 -0500, R0b0t1 escribió:
> Hello friends!
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Christopher Díaz Riveros
> <chrisadr@g.o> wrote:
> > Daniel,
> >
> > El lun, 02-04-2018 a las 09:23 -0600, Daniel Robbins escribió:
> > > On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 7:53 AM, Christopher Díaz Riveros
> > > <chrisadr@g.o> wrote:
> > > > _You_ can say that this is your Burden of proof that mgorny is
> > > > not
> > > > capable of being a Council member, but in the same line, _your
> > > > post_
> > > > shows that you are neither in position to be a good Council
> > > > member
> > > > or
> > > > project lead, at least that's just _my_ opinion about this
> > > > post.
> > >
> > > I am perfectly happy with you having that opinion, because I have
> > > never had any intention of being a Council member or project
> > > lead,
> > > nor "returning BDFL" of Gentoo that mgorny insinuates.
> > >
> >
> > No Daniel, but the fact is that you have history with Gentoo, even
> > when
> > you don't see yourself trying to be a "leader", you need to act
> > like
> > one.
> >
> > This reminds me some horrible local news from my country, where a
> > congressman had to made public some videos about corruption that we
> > suffer as country, that ended up in the resignation of our
> > president.
> > Maybe he had to leave, but making pressure by using private videos
> > and
> > then release them to public, was definetly not he correct way to do
> > that.
> >
> > This is the fact from you fact-list:
> >
> > You showed the whole mailing list (and leaved a permanent tracking
> > file) a conversation that was not previously seen by ComRel (which
> > is
> > the project who you should try to contact before making this kind
> > of
> > information public). Even when you are "just another user" here...
> > I
> > mean, you run Funtoo, you are a public leader, and how could I
> > possibly
> > trust my leader if he shows private conversations publicly...
> > that's a
> > fact no matter with whom the conversation is, or what is it about.
> >
>
> While in general I have no business posting here, I think I should
> rephrase what it seems you are saying:
>
> "People should not be held accountable for their actions, because
> that
> might make them feel bad."
>
> I would be hard pressed to find people who agree.
>
>
> Using the (US) legal system as a guide, if I break the law to obtain
> evidence of someone *else* breaking the law, that evidence is
> admissible (if I remember correctly) because I am not the government.
> However, it is likely I would still be prosecuted for whatever law
> that I broke, though in some areas any charges might be waived by
> statute.
>
> In a semi-related vein, the majority of US states do not require that
> all parties agree to have their correspondence recorded for any of
> the
> participants to record that correspondence.
>
>
> It stands to reason that if someone sees you behaving in a manner
> they
> think others should be made aware of, society already supports making
> others aware of those actions, even if custom would be to keep them
> private.
>

You may not remember correctly. In some cases evidence as this may be
admissible (i agree with that), but that evidence must have a predicate
with it. What if all those "logs" are not authentic? (I'm not saying I
personally believe that, but that's a valid assumption) This is an
internal issue between a group of individuals, let's say just for
example mgorny, drobbins and maybe those who Daniel is helping to stop
the _abuse_.

Now, *abuse* is a strong word, and those who read the list may or may
not be aware of the whole situation and the whole context from that
word. Some of them may even take a side in this discussion and start to
think that one or both parties are doing things wrong. That is not
correct because this is not the place to bring inter personal issues,
as the mailing list states : non-technical discussion (related to
Gentoo as a project) and propositions to Council, it does not say
intra-developer or advanced users relations.

And as you say, evidence should be only used in courts, in this case,
ComRel should be the group of persons reviewing this evidence, not the
whole list and as such people start to "judge" without the whole
context.

And yes, a healthy society does encourage people to speak when things
are not going well, but all of that needs to be done between the
correct procedures. If that's not the way to solve problems, then we
don't have a society.

Regards,
-- 
Christopher Díaz Riveros
Gentoo Linux Developer
GPG Fingerprint: E517 5ECB 8152 98E4 FEBC  2BAA 4DBB D10F 0FDD 2547