I have been following this discussion since the start and I have to say that it has been very informative (mostly from a social perspective), but I have been disappointed with the, um, vigorous responses from all sides.
The original post was somewhat blunt and probably could be labeled as insensitive, and it could have been written with much better social decorum (and for this an apology would be in order). Unfortunately the communal response with some exceptions (thank you Chris) was equally missing in generosity, sensitivity and decorum. I suspect all of us are familiar with the realization that email can be interpreted in the most unflattering ways despite the best of intentions... and assuming TROLL intentions in this case I see as somewhat ungenerous. Maybe this could be a good reminder to us all as to how even the best of projects and lists are susceptible to issues of email misunderstanding and how important great efforts of respect and decorum on all sides is necessary. This article (although old) is a good reminder of how problematic this issue is... http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/02/70179 Sincerely Alex -- Alex DiMarco ------------ www.cdf.toronto.edu Bahen Centre 40 St. George Street, Room 3224 Toronto, Ontario M5S 2E4 416-946-8862 * For immediate assistance to share your desktop: Download TeamViewer for Windows<https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6gjd_s18mk_NFJURDFZc1hJNGs/edit?usp=sharing> Download Teamviewer for Mac<https://doc-0o-bc-docs.googleusercontent.com/docs/securesc/ha0ro937gcuc7l7deffksulhg5h7mbp1/qkdd01nrdvv39t978l696ov6uu3um42h/1365811200000/04448104139661905429/*/0B6gjd_s18mk_YzJJSDE3am5yZWs?e=download> On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Paul Mather <[email protected]>wrote: > On Oct 12, 2013, at 11:23 AM, Oliver Hansen <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 4:10 AM, Thinker Rix <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On 2013-10-09 19:38, Jim Thompson wrote: >> >>> So asking the question is stupid >>> >> >> On 2013-10-09 19:50, Jim Thompson wrote: >> >>> IMO, this bullshit thread only serves to assist those asking the >>> question in stroking their own ego. >>> >> >> On 2013-10-12 01:40, Jim Thompson wrote: >> >>> Otherwise: get off my lawn. >>> I'm not willing to endure this uninformed Alex Jonesian crapfest. >>> Now that I'm back on US soil, I promise that if the later continues, I >>> will kill the thread. People who hijack threads will be dealt with. >>> Otherwise: STFU. >>> >>> Nor will I endure the besmirching of pfSense's good name and trademark. >>> >> >> The only one who is besmirching pfSense here is: you - given that as a >> co-owner of ESF you are an official representative of pfSense - and your >> official communication unfortunately shows that you are a vulgarian, >> plebeian, obscene, scurrilous goon, who insults, threatens, bullys, censors >> and muzzles other community members, totally lacking control of himself and >> any professional business manners whatsoever, let alone any constructive >> discussion culture. >> >> To me it feels highly awkward and it is unsettling me a lot, that such an >> ill-mannered, shady and dubious roughneck like you holds a key position in >> the project that creates the security product that we use for protecting >> our networks. >> >> I have no idea why highly respected Chris Buechler partnered with you, >> but it might be good if you would learn a lesson from him concerning his >> professionalism, seriousness and manners in his official communication. >> >> Bye. > > > I can't say I agree with Thinker Rix on everything but on this I do agree. > I have been on this list for many years (mostly just reading) and have > always been impressed with the professionalism of most members who write > and especially those affiliated with the project. I have been quite > surprised and disappointed in the attitude and tone coming from Jim > Thompson this last week and in my opinion THAT is what reflects poorly on > the project. > > > It may be that Jim simply saw what looked like a sock puppet come onto the > list and start spreading FUD about ESF and pfSense. Normally, when you > see what you consider to be a troll, the usually response is "don't feed > the troll" and ignore the thread until it runs out of fuel. I guess the > response is different, though, when someone is directing FUD at your > company. Then, rather than annoyance and bruised egos, the damage can be > more real and a more robust response might be warranted. > > It's up to Jim how he expresses himself. Given that "Thinker Rix" was > doing a remarkable job of impersonating a troll (IMHO), I think the blunt > approach is the pragmatic logical endpoint of that dialogue. It's sad, but > dealing with trolls is a sad business. :-( > > Cheers, > > Paul. > > > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > >
_______________________________________________ List mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
