I can respect that. I'll take a week off the list and try to check myself in the future. I'm sorry to everyone on python-ideas. I'm sorry Steven.
On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 2:38 PM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > I'm starting a new thread on this to make sure it receives appropriate > visibility for everyone on this list. *There are ramifications for those > involved in this whole situation* as outlined at the end of this email. > > To review, this mailing list operates under the PSF Community Code of > Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ . That means everyone > is expected to be open, considerate, and respectful. Titus and I have > operated this list such that people who don't follow the CoC get a warning, > then a temporary ban of a month or two, then a year-long ban, then a > permanent ban (and we reserve the right to skip any of these steps as we > see fit based on how bad the infraction was). Since the traffic here can > get a bit heavy and thus we don't read every email, we rely on people > reporting things as appropriate to python-ideas-owner@ if things have > gotten out of hand. > > And boy did things get out of hand on the "Syntactic sugar to declare > partial functions" thread. Here is what I saw play out (bolding is mine): > > ---------- > [Abe] > Words like 'partial', 'curry', 'lambda', and 'closure' are fine for text > books, published papers, and technical discussion, *but I think they > would (or do in the case of 'lambda') harm Python*. > > [Steven] > *That's an extreme overreaction*. > > Do you mean to imply that there are people who looked at Python, loved > the language, but decided to use something else because they didn't like > the choice of the keyword "lambda"? > > If not, in what way is Python harmed? Would it be faster if the keyword > was "function", or use less memory, or more expressive? > > Remember that to millions of programmers in the world, "function" is > just as much an obscure foreign piece of jargon they have to memorise as > "lambda" is to English-speakers. > > [Abe] > Extreme? I thought it was a rather benign opinion.* I'm not exactly > frothing at the mouth here. It's not like I'm declaring holy war on Python > for using the word 'lambda'.* I just think it was a mistake (and > thatdeath should come to all non-believers). > > [Steve] > > You've said that the choice of keyword, "lambda", has caused harm. Given > the chance to clarify what you meant, > *you stood by your comment that thechoice of keyword "lambda" has done > real, significant, non-trivial harm* > to Python (the language, or the community). Presumably you fear the same > thing will happen again if we choose "partial" (otherwise, why raise the > issue?). > > [Abe] > Notice:* I never said "real, significant, non-trivial harm" anywhere* in > this entire discussion. I never said anything close to that. *Stop > jamming bullshit in my mouth* to suit your narrative that I'm "extremely > overreacting". It's not cute. > ---------- > > The way I read this going down is Abe thought something "would harm > Python". "Harm" is a strong word to use, so Steven called it an "extreme > overreaction". Now stating it like a fact is unnecessary, abrasive, and a > bit of hyperbole. Abe thought we he thought and that's fine, but it isn't > universally considered an overreaction; it was an opinion and Abe correctly > stated it as such. Steven could have easily left out the hyperbole and > framing like a statement of fact and still made the same point. > > Abe then reacted with more hyperbole as he disagreed with Steven's > statement that he was overreacting. So now we are reacting to hyperbole > with hyperbole. > > Steven then reacted by overstating the strength of Abe's initial > intentions. That's a misunderstanding at best, entirely misleading at worst. > > At that point Abe crossed a line and basically yelled at Steven to "stop > jamming bullshit in [his] mouth". > > So how should have this been handled? First, dropping all hyperbole, not > stating opinions as facts, and not being so abrasive would have probably > stopped all of this from happening. Had Steven just said "I think that's an > overreaction; can you please clarify what harm you think happened?" then he > would have gotten the answer he wanted and Abe would not have taken > offense. Abe replying with his own hyperbole didn't help. > > Steven also didn't need to misrepresent what Abe said. Choosing to > re-interpret what level of harm Abe meant was not appropriate (unless > Steven got a bit sloppy and replied from memory instead of going back and > reading the emails he was replying to). > > And finally, Abe's response was totally uncalled for. I don't care how out > of line someone on this list is, you don't react like that. You come to > Titus and me and we will handle it. If you need to, step back for an hour > or day before replying if that's what it takes to not react in a rude > manner. > > I shouldn't be having to explain to adults on how to communicate among > strangers of different cultures, but here we are. I did an entire PyCon US > keynote on why we need to treat open source as a series of kindnesses and > react as such: https://youtu.be/tzFWz5fiVKU?t=49m29s . If we don't treat > everything as a kindness then open source simply doesn't work and people > end up walking way from open source and the Python community. > > So,* ramifications from all of this* ... > > Steven, stop stating your opinion as fact and being needlessly abrasive. > Your abrasiveness in responses has pushed multiple threads to breaking > points like this before and I know you have the skills to not do that if > you chose to because I've seen it here and on other mailing lists. > Constructive conversations never need anything abrasive in them in order to > get your intentions across. Consider this a warning to scale back the tone > in response to be more respectful. > > Abe, you're receiving a warning about how you eventually reacted. In the > future please just step away from the keyboard until you can react > appropriately. The way you responded to Steven is not acceptable as it > isn't respectful to others on this list and there shouldn't be "vigilante > responses"; if you feel someone has violated the CoC then tell us admins > and we will handle it. > > -Brett & Titus >
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
