| 1 |
On 06/20/19 14:24, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 7:41 AM Thomas Deutschmann <whissi@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> During council meeting from 2019-05-12, we, the current running council, |
| 5 |
>> tried to make it very clear that we are really concerned about |
| 6 |
>> undertaker project's attitude expressed in pre-meeting talk in |
| 7 |
>> #gentoo-council on 2019-05-08, 2019-05-09 and during meeting. And it |
| 8 |
>> looks like you still haven't understand our point: |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> You are lacking humanity. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> The Proctors have decided that this post/message/etc is in violation |
| 13 |
> of the Gentoo Code of Conduct and are issuing this warning. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> While we recognize that a language barrier may have resulted in this |
| 16 |
> statement being made more strongly than intended, it is still a |
| 17 |
> personal attack in nature. When discussing application of policy it |
| 18 |
> is better to focus on the policy itself and its application, and less |
| 19 |
> on the individuals making the decisions. If there are concerns with |
| 20 |
> how an individual is interacting with others on a personal level, this |
| 21 |
> should be raised in private with Comrel, if direct communication |
| 22 |
> fails. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> The fact that the discussion involves current/former council members |
| 25 |
> makes it important to try to set an example. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Since Proctors is still a fairly new concept we wish to clarify that: |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> * Proctors doesn't get involved in trying to resolve interpersonal |
| 30 |
> conflict or gauge intent - we're focused on what was said and trying |
| 31 |
> to improve how we communicate. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> * Proctors doesn't make value judgments regarding the people making |
| 34 |
> statements, just what was said. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> * Proctors warnings do not have any cumulative effect, or any direct |
| 37 |
> effect at all. This is intended to try to encourage good behavior, |
| 38 |
> not to punish. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
Just so everyone is clear on this, exactly how is it bad to explain how |
| 41 |
someone appears to demonstrate a lack of empathy? Especially after the |
| 42 |
individual who posted the message in question apologized for any offense |
| 43 |
caused before proctors stepped in? |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Does the proctors project acknowledge that posting such a warning very |
| 46 |
much appears to just be flagging something to complain to comrel about |
| 47 |
later, and that by excluding the apology this appears to be all the more |
| 48 |
biased? |
Archives