Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> Alan,
>
> Given some of the emails you yourself have written in the last few days
> (and many times prior to that) as well as your penchant for
> making disparaging remarks in commit messages, I find this development
> highly hypocritical and disturbing.
>
> I will neither condone such biased and self-serving censorship nor
> participate in it.
> Should any censorship come to pass, I will be immediately unsubscribing
> from the affected lists.
This is not about avoiding disagreement, but expressing it civilly. I
_value_ disagreement. I rarely learn anything from someone who agrees
with me. I don't value unkind words, nor insults, nor personal attacks,
nor deliberate telling of untruths. And from what I have seen, neither
do you.
I would certainly agree that I have made remarks in the past which I
have regretted, and which I should not have made (although most were in
private emails). You and I have discussed this. I don't see how trying
to do better, and get all of us to do better in the future is hypocritical.
This isn't intended to be about the past - yours or mine, nor is it
about censorship. It's not ideas that are being suppressed here. There
is no opinion that you can't express civilly. I can't say that in the
heat of the moment that it will always be easy, but rising up out of
insults, baiting, and personal attacks is a worthwhile thing to do.
It's just about being civil in the future - at least in public.
Civility won't stop people from getting their feelings hurt, because
only withdrawing from reality can stop that. But it will put a bound on
those hurt feelings.
I fully expect that you and others will hold me accountable, and I'm
confident that you will make your opinions known in a civil way. If
that means that you need to preview my emails to the list for a month,
then by all means, we can do that.
I have tried very hard to express my disagreements in a civil way in
recent months. If you have some particular thing which I've said in an
uncivil way in a public mailing list in the past few months, please
bring it to my attention privately. [It sounds like you have some
examples. I'm sure I could learn to do better from them, if you would
kindly share them with me].
I understand part of what you're saying, but part still mystifies me, so
I would appreciate it if you would help me understand.
What would you propose that we do?
Continue to tolerate uncivil behavior without bound?
Are you saying civil behavior is of no value?
Are you saying that I'm too thin-skinned? [very possibly a legitimate
complaint].
I seem to be getting a feeling that you suspect that this is a way of
getting people I don't agree with to shut up. (i.e. censorship of
ideas). Was it your intent that I understand you that way?
What I'm asking for here is a little adult self-control - not censorship
of ideas, but a little self control in deciding not to bash people, and
to try and avoid personal attacks and harsh words. Surely we can
disagree without being disagreeable.
Is this something bad to ask for?
Am I completely missing the boat here?
If you have an alternate proposal, please make it.
For example, would you be willing to have civility be considered
important, and provide feedback, or have it be provided by others, as
long as no penalties were ever incurred beyond reminders?
If you don't like me being the person who does this, then let someone
who is the very spirit of decorum and kindness (David Lee?) be the
person to handle penalties, should the be necessary. [David, please
forgive me for mentioning you without checking first].
If I behave uncivilly, I know without a doubt that there are those on
this list who will instantly let me know when I transgress. I would be
honored if you would be among them. This would be good. Accountability
is good.
The proposal I made doesn't have to be carried out as it was first
written. I no doubt came across as inflexible. I didn't intend to be
inflexible. I am very serious about improving the atmosphere here - and
I have some cleanup of my own to do. I'd go for any proposal which
would help. If it doesn't work perfectly, then we can refine it - by
mutual agreement.
I see my main fault here as not having done this many years ago. It was
was easier to let people off the hook than it was to confront them.
And, by not confronting them, it was easier for me to respond in kind,
which put them in the position of feeling like they'd been attacked...
This went around and around. I think stopping this cycle of behavior is
a good thing.
Although I disagree with the skepticism you expressed, I understand it,
and I appreciate the fact that you expressed your disagreement civilly.
Thank you for taking the time to express your opinions on this.
I would value hearing from you on how we can raise the level of
discourse on the mailing lists from everyone.
--
Alan Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Openness is the foundation and preservative of friendship... Let me
claim from you at all times your undisguised opinions." - William
Wilberforce
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
