1 |
On 12/15/20 18:13, Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
> Hi, |
3 |
> |
4 |
> I'd like to propose amending Gentoo's CoC through adding the following |
5 |
> point: |
6 |
> |
7 |
> - *Use concise and clear language.* The Gentoo community includes |
8 |
> people from all over the world, with varying English skills and |
9 |
> available time. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> |
12 |
> Rationale: |
13 |
> |
14 |
> The primary purpose of communication on Gentoo media is to share |
15 |
> information. In order for this goal to be achieved, it is important |
16 |
> that the recipients of the message (presumably arbitrary Gentoo users |
17 |
> following the mailing lists) can understand these messages. |
18 |
> |
19 |
> Furthermore, we should note that people don't have infinite time to |
20 |
> spend on reading mails. Both sending unnecessarily long mails |
21 |
> and using hard to understand language means that both users and |
22 |
> developers have to spend ever increasing amount of time to participate |
23 |
> or at least follow conversations. Eventually, it means that some |
24 |
> people who can't afford to read all the text are excluded. |
25 |
> |
26 |
> In my opinion, it's also a matter of respecting others and their time. |
27 |
> In the extreme case, some people are deliberately participating |
28 |
> in the described way in order to waste other people's time, to exclude |
29 |
> them if they can't manage to keep up, to push their ideas forward while |
30 |
> drowning the opposition in the storm of long replies. |
31 |
> |
32 |
Banning nuance and depth in favor of arguing over who thinks what is |
33 |
clear and/or concise seems counterproductive at best. |
34 |
|
35 |
For a trivial example, consider the time investment involved in news |
36 |
items, both writing and parsing them. |
37 |
|
38 |
Also, if the goal is to deal with things which could confuse a reader; |
39 |
is it not be better to promote an environment where the reader is |
40 |
comfortable with asking for clarification instead of feeling the need to |
41 |
rely on potentially faulty assumptions? |