Hi Louis

Louis Desjardins wrote:

> I did not intend to offend anybody here. If I did, I apologize in advance.

You do not offend. You probably wrote this email with the best
intentions, but you seem unaware of many things that have happened.

> I cannot discuss the reasons of each and everyone talking here in their
> personal name as I barely show up on IRC on the gimp channel. I believe
> each has good reasons to express what they feel regarding Carol's
> behavior. At the same time, I for one feel pretty unconfortable with
> where this discussion is heading now that it has deviated on medical
> "diagnostic"... and still being made public. I strongly believe the
> advice on Carol's condition is completely out of the purpose of this
> list — of any list, I should say. This is private matter. A public
> discussion on an archived list is not the same as a kitchen discussion
> with whoever about whatever or whoever. I am really unconfortable now
> and I believe I am not alone in this situation.

Firstly this `medical help' criticism has gone way overboard. I did not
reveal some secret file about Carol, or something that was actually
diagnosed by a doctor who confided in me. My _opinion_ was from her
public behaviour towards me and others in the IRC channel and emails.
This opinion is not irrational or random, and I am entitled to say it
having been publicly harassed and I have proof to back it up. When I say
she should seek help, I say that out of sympathy.

Almost every GIMP developer is aware of her eccentric behaviour and my
email was written out of frustration, having read something that very
day on IRC.

It pretty much concerns this list, because developers will leave unless
this topic is solved (there is a limit to tolerating harassment), and
this thread was started by the maintainer of GIMP. This thread _is_
about Carol's behaviour.

> I suggest to stop this thread and refrain from commenting further on
> personnal things such as the health of somebody. At the same time, I
> think that once the heat will be down a few degrees, the case should be
> discussed among the team on a private channel and preferably including
> Carol so she can express herself or at least understand what is going on
> and if exclusion is voted, at the very least the accused person knows
> exaclty what are the reproaches made to her, from an official point of
> view, with objective rules that anyone can understand and agree upon. I
> guess that before getting this far, an official warning should take
> place. If nothing changes, then a final warning and then, the
> consequences of being banned from the various gimp channels or monitored
> or whatever measures the team decides. The  incremental consequences of
> a specific bad behavior should be publicly known. The bad behavior
> should be clearly identified too, and described. These rules are
> necessary for any kind of human community.

You seem to talk of ideal conditions, which haven't existed. Who is
`official' exactly? Yosh? Sven? You and me? So far there have been
disagreements, and complaints have gone unanswered, and I guess this
thread was started out of frustration by Sven. You talk of these
official methods---do you know of our complaints so far? Carol has been
asked politely several times to leave the project, and has been
explained the reasons for it which she is well aware of. Nobody is
prejudiced here. If she is to change today completely and turn a new
leaf, she will be welcome. But that seems very unlikely, going by how
she doesn't seem to care. She had received her `final warning' several
times from Sven.

Discussions should be public. This is a public project, people were
harassed in public on IRC. IMHO, the discussion should be public so that
everyone including Carol knows what progressed, and we can all say what
we have to say.

> The gimp officials have to discuss about the facts going on the gimp
> channels. Nothing less. Nothing more. And take action on these facts,
> leaving behind any further considerations and suppositions.

This is exactly what was discussed. And when you have a person speaking
like a nutcase in public, it's not entirely unexpected if someone calls
him/her a nutcase. It's not a secret or some private data made public.
Linus called the Subversion developers stupid in his Git talk and meant
it, for just getting merging wrong.

I am not exactly prejudiced as I think somewhere inside she is probably
a good person, but I have sure been irritated by her (and it seems that
that's continuing, considering what happened yesterday morning which was
out of the blue having had her on /ignore for a long time).

Kind regards,


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to