Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Why do people actually believe that telling everyone to ignore flames is a > workable strategy? [...]
I don't. debian is not (should not be) a monoculture and there's the danger of ignoring badly-worded non-flame/troll posts, which is silly and intolerant. It's absolutely obvious that ignoring all conflicts will never resolve any conflicts. In some cases, it will just further inflame the situation by ignoring a legitimate complaint underlying the flame. Many of the larger lists have a social aspect, so I think we need "list guiders" on large debian lists, taking care of social aspects, working with the listmasters for any technical needs. Any really flammable lists may need to be guided by listmasters until they calm down. Delegating someone to articulate the list code of conduct in public without confrontation and help any troubled users seems a good way to douse flames and deter repeats. See: http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/archive/CSI/WP/WP02-03B.html http://www.ibiblio.org/oswg/oswg-nightly/oswg/en_US.ISO_8859-1/articles/mladvice/mladvice/x239.html but it's not entirely reliable if the listmasters are AWOL and http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/killfile/antitrollfaqhtm.htm from usenet may become more relevant. > Heck, for that matter, look at the case of the debian-women list [...] Stupidly, the debian-women list FAQ on http://women.alioth.debian.org/faqs/ cites the indiana.edu paper above, but ignores its conclusion recommending a clear pro-active process to educate users and address problems. Instead, it advocates the ignorance approach to conflict. I'm not at all surprised that debian-women has banned already. -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
