Re: [gentoo-project] Fw: Your temporary 2 week suspension on interacting on the Gentoo Github page

[Dale]

Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote:
>> What stops me, is seeing someone who wants to help get shut down by others
>> just because they don't like him and in my opinion, targets him whenever
>> possible.
> You're making assumptions about motives.  The fact is that you don't
> have any knowledge about why some people aren't welcome in the
> community.

Actually, I'm basing it on what I can clearly see.  If I can see it,
don't you think others can too?  Again, ignoring it, trying to force
people not to talk about it, doesn't help the problem.  Like I said, I
been around Gentoo for a long time.  I won't be a dev because of lots of
things over the years I've seen happen, most of them in public.  Just
because I rarely post, doesn't mean I don't see it.  I have emails from
this list going back to 2007, -dev to 2009.  Some of the others may even
go back further.  I read a lot of them too.  I used to have them further
back than that.

>
> I'm not aware of anybody who is unwelcome to contribute to Gentoo
> merely because people don't like them.  I certainly don't have
> knowledge of every particular case, so perhaps there have been cases
> where this is the case.
>
> However, part of the problem is that you're allowed to make
> allegations like this on the lists, and anybody who has direct
> knowledge to the contrary in any particular situation is not allowed
> to say so.  So, when we allow these sorts of things to be discussed on
> the lists anybody reading the archives will inevitably get the
> impression that Gentoo boots people out for arbitrary reasons.
>

Based on recent events, I think I can name one for sure.  I might add,
it's not the first time I've seen this happen either.  I just usually
don't post about it. 


>> Why not let those who want to help, help.
> Here is a completely contrived example (to avoid talking about
> specific individuals) of why this doesn't work:
>
> Suppose for the sake of argument that somebody was using
> dev.gentoo.org as a platform to hack into various servers on the
> internet.  This is discovered, and their access is revoked and they're
> no longer permitted to access any Gentoo-controlled systems.  No
> public announcement is made of the incident or that the person is
> banned or why.
>
> Then that individual tries to post a pull request/etc and participate
> in the community and complains that their accounts keep getting shut
> down/etc.  They say that they're being unfairly persecuted because
> somebody has a personal grudge against them.
>
> Policy at Gentoo right now is to not deny their accusation at all.
> So, now we have everybody up in arms about people being oppressed,
> when the person they're defending is in fact a criminal and Gentoo
> could be subject to legal liability if they were to knowingly give
> this person access to our resources and they were used as a platform
> to launch some future attack against somebody.
>
> Sometimes people do things that are seriously wrong, and choosing to
> allow them to participate could cause problems.  However, we also
> can't talk about why they're gone because that creates debates about
> the accuracy of allegations and possibly opens us up to lawsuits as
> well if we get any of the facts wrong.  This is why every organization
> I'm familiar with doesn't handle these sorts of issues publicly.
>
> Again, nothing in this email should be construed to imply that any
> particular individual has done anything particularly wrong.
>

To quote Dr. Phil, how's that working our for you or Gentoo?  Basically
what you are saying is, you won't share what went on even when most if
not all of it is public?  I've read a LOT of Williams posts.  So far, I
haven't seen him post about a problem that I haven't already seen as well. 

Question.  Some group/company wants to switch to Gentoo.  They even plan
to bring some people who can code with them to help.  They go look to
see what Gentoo offers and what versions of packages are ready for use. 
They see that some key packages are out of date and would require a lot
of work up front to get them ready, even if done on a local basis.  Do
you really think they are going to look for reasons they are not up to
date?  You think that group/company is going to be switching when they
can't even have up to date packages ready to work?  Not likely.  Even if
they don't look at any mailing list posts, all they have to do is look
at the tree to see that Gentoo doesn't offer what they need.  Someone
posting that java or some other packages is short on manpower isn't the
end of the world when anyone who cares to look can go to the tree and
see for themselves, Gentoo is short on manpower because that stuff is
old.  Unless Gentoo is planning to hide the tree so people can't see
what is not up to date, people can see the status for themselves if they
look. Heck, I go look at packages.g.o myself quite often. 


>> So, pointing out that people care is now considered a bad thing?
> I didn't say that it was "bad."  I merely pointed out that people
> constantly talking about how terrible Gentoo is probably will probably
> be a self-fulfilling prophesy.  Bad PR, whether true or not, tends to
> result in damaged reputation.
>

As I said, people already know.  If I mention to someone that I use
Gentoo, they tell me all the things they heard about Gentoo.  I might
add, what William has pointed out isn't even bad compared to what is out
there.  That self-fulfilling prophecy is already filling itself because
the problems go on for years with no one changing anything and pushing
away or ignoring those who want to help.  My post isn't all about
William.  It was also about the person that put in all that effort only
to be ignored for it.  I can't help but notice you snipped that part. 
Odd thing is, that is a important part of it.  The William situation is
bad enough.  You say it is something that I don't know about.  Fine,
what about the other person that put in all that effort only to get
ignored, until William was good enough to post what the problem is and
then be punished for it?  The part about William isn't just what
happened years ago.  Most of it is about what happened a few days ago. 

Dale

:-)  :-)