| 1 |
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Raymond Jennings <shentino@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> I would like to propose that the purpose of gentoo-project be more visibly |
| 3 |
> documented and declared. Apart from william's rants, which do not surprise |
| 4 |
> me as being off topic, I *was* surprised to have someone yelling at my |
| 5 |
> former mentor about the posts I was making. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I would like to suggest that the purpose of the list be more explicitly |
| 8 |
> documented or at least explained. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I'll bring it up along with the topic. Also, please don't reply to |
| 12 |
-announce (though I suspect in your case it probably bounced your |
| 13 |
email; if you become a dev at some point you'll want to be careful |
| 14 |
about it). |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
The below is just my personal opinion: |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Honestly, though, I personally don't think that direct personal |
| 19 |
attacks should really be considered on-topic for any list we host. |
| 20 |
Constructive discussion and disagreement with what our policies should |
| 21 |
be is generally on-topic for this list (though let's be realistic, not |
| 22 |
everybody is ever going to agree completely and repetitiveness isn't |
| 23 |
helpful even though we might all be passionate about our beliefs). |
| 24 |
Something that more specifically pertains to a Foundation policy would |
| 25 |
be more on-topic for the -nfp list. Obviously to some extent there is |
| 26 |
some overlap in topics across the various lists, and IMO for the most |
| 27 |
part this stuff hasn't been a problem. I'm personally inclined to |
| 28 |
think that moving council discussions to a different list or |
| 29 |
moderating -project is not the right solution at this time. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Rich |
Archives