Erinn Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005:03:10 10:33 +0000]:=20 > > Some of my suggestions have been accepted previously. Damned > > if I can find the right bug tracker entries for them, though. > Yeah, a bug tracker might be nice, but it seems a bit overboard [...]
I was pretty sure I put at least one suggestion through a bug tracker. My memory is not brilliant. Others were almost all off-list because of the atmosphere, so can't be shown in public and that means some here wouldn't believe it. :-/ > > This is a lower priority than some other tasks (package review > > and upload, for example) and I feel progress is impeded by some > > irrational or uncommunicative people. For example, "Searching > > for Safety Online" (which recommends "pro-active interventions") > > has been used to justify the debate-killing silence policy in > > the List FAQ, which seems just plain broken. > IIRC, you recommended having someone designated as a sort of "troll > detector" or similar who would decide that $PERSON wasn't worth responding > too and announce it to the list. Luckily we haven't had to resort to any > similar measures since last year. [...] That's almost it, but there was also that the "detector" (I think I meant "troll advisor" but I'm not sure whether I used that name) should inform $PERSON off-list and advise them how they could get a voice within the debian-women culture. Probably a lot of the time that will be directing to FAQs or codes, but there's always something not covered there. Using a smaller number of people makes it easier to spot new conduct FAQs without overwhelming the list while people acculturate(?). I think you've not felt the need because debian-women hasn't been communicating with the rest of the project as much as when Amaya sent out that mailshot. Is this because debian-women learnt from the response? Do you feel the group learnt the best thing? > I don't consider ignoring people who seem to be out to shut down what we're > working on "broken" though. You may be enlightened by what you call > "debates", but many people (including myself) consider them draining, > pointless arguments, which may explain some of our silence in this thread > as well. There are points to them, in both directions, although sometimes the noise gets high here. Refusing to accept debate reinforces my impression of debian-women as irrationally stubborn. I find this quite amusing: my complaints to you seem similar to Sven's complaints to debian-legal. > Well, that is fine, but there are also some things you are unaware of as a > result of your lack of time / interest. Sure, so I thought it was idle. After a claim d-w is good at communications, I asked questions about the stuff I last heard happening and got flamed for that by Matthew Palmer in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. Maybe I shouldn't have put my other stuff in the same mail, but we can cut mails. > [...] I do not think that, due to their contributions, any of us would be > opposed to having them on the website. [...] Wow! That wasn't the impression I got last time I asked. If I submit a patch to http://women.alioth.debian.org/involvement/ that reflects that, will you accept it? (Actually, how do I make a patch for that?) > How we function is pretty basic: negativity is uncalled for and we don't > respond well to it, if at all. As time goes on we evolve to meet certain > desires or needs as they arise. Requesting -- nay, demanding -- we evolve to > meet your needs when you have not shown any vested interest in the group in > any way, nor do you wish to contribute anything positive, is sure to be met > with silence at best, hostility at worst. (I discourage the latter and I > think we've improved in that area as well.) I'm uninterested in the debian-women group and don't wish to contribute anything which you consider positive yet because I feel I basically disagree with you in the direction it's heading. Equally, because I'm uninterested in the particular group, I don't intend to harm it, but I will discourage acts which I am interested in and think harmful. I reiterate that the "silence" policy hinders you. I wish I could find the right campaign note here, but my workspace is a mess today. It suggests a short, polite, closed dismissal works better than trying to ignore their view, which fits with preserving "democratic possibility" or "political possibility" as a way to avoid conflict. Do you know that idea too? Silence beats getting the flamethrower out, but it's not best practice. A difficulty of words is that it's not as obvious whether excitement is from fight or progress, especially when we're not sharing a common culture. That isn't a good argument for monoculture, in my opinion, nor for silence. -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Subscribed to this list. No need to Cc, thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
