Junio C Hamano wrote: > 0. You do not take offense, no matter what. If someone attacks > you irrationally, you do not respond. This is a public mailing > list, and we are all rational people: the attacker has already > humiliated herself in public, and everyone can see that. [...] > I suspect it mostly has to do with the desire to make sure that > bystanders do not get an impression that the one who speaks last > gives the conclusion to the discussion, so stating "The attacker > being the one who speaks last in the discussion does not mean the > conclusion is his." explicitly might be one way to make it more > practically useful by alleviating the urge to respond, instead of > saying "no matter what". > > I dunno.
Actually my motivation is worse than that in at least one of the cases I am assuming Ram is referring to. I don't think most bystanders would misunderstand if I let a certain person alone instead of responding and saying "You are being unproductive. Please stop." But that certain person seems to misunderstand, whether I say that or not. So when I lose patience I say so, knowing that it will spark a discussion with others, knowing that that discussion needs to happen and that if the problem is not addressed I will continue to lose motivation for regular work on-list. Is that an instance of taking offense and letting emotion overtake reason? Is that against the rules? Jonathan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html