On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 01:40:03PM +0100, Salve J Nilsen wrote:
> I think _some_ kind of shaming should be allowed. Carrots are good, but
> sticks work too when applied in a respectable fashion.
They might, but a "hall of shame" ain't respectable. If I were on the
list, then it would just make me think "cpants is run by a bunch of
cunts, so i'll just ignore them".
> But taking down the hall of shame smells awefully like the chinese press
> rules ("We are only allowed to publish _good_ news about ourselves!")
There's plenty of bad things said on CPANTS still - I have angry red
marks against my name for all sorts of things. But I don't mind,
because they're backed up with an explanation. Saying "DCANTRELL is a
bad programmer and should be ashamed of himself" will merely make me
think less of you. But saying "DCANTRELL didn't include a changelog in
some of his distributions, we think that's bad because ..." is called
Constructive Criticism. Of course, that doesn't mean I'm paying any
attention, but at least I haven't dismissed CPANTS as the work of
ill-mannered lunatics.
--
David Cantrell | Reality Engineer, Ministry of Information
You can't spell "slaughter" without "laughter"
