Re: [FFmpeg-devel] bans

[Ivan Kalvachev]

On 6/16/16, Michael Niedermayer  wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:50:51AM -0300, James Almer wrote:
>> On 6/15/2016 10:14 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> > Hi all
>> >
>> > As noone is doing anything about the situation and what is being
>> > done will not lead anywhere (the vote likely wont lead anywhere as
>> > likely few would ban a active developer 4 month and then if not
>> > some will feel injustice prevailed thus
>> >
>> > After writing this mail i will
>> >
>> > 1. ban carl for 24h from the ML due to
>> > causing  derek to leave the project. (24h was suggested in the IRC
>> > meeting)
>>
>> This is useless IMO. While four months is too much, 24 hours is
>> insignificant.
>>
>
>> Let's not implement bans without a discussion and a vote first.
>
> I agree but if i do nothing people are unhappy that i did nothing,
> if i talk with people trying to resolve a conflict well, it did not
> work this time. and if i do something else people complain too.
> and its 4 weeks since the incident.
> Doing some symbolic action seemed to make sense until the people
> finish discussions and votes.
> I believe i do not have the authority to hand out real (week+) bans,
> nor would i want that authority. Also i will stay away
> from symbolic bans too, this was intended to improve the situation,
> and i believe it did not achieve that.

One way to resolve the matter as mature people would be
asking Carl to explain his words and actions in civilized manner,
then apologize for going over the board.

It is completely counterproductive to escalate the issue with
attempts for public humiliation and punishment,
without making attempts for addressing the bad behavior
they are supposed to stop.



>> The current vote will probably go nowhere, so a proper discussion thread
>> followed by a vote will have to be made.
>
> Yes,
> its up to the vote committee and the community to decide what should
> be done.
>
>
>>
>> > I suspect carl saw the merges done by derek as causing more bugs than
>> > good so he attacked until derek stoped doing the merges.
>>
>> Which is the shitty behavior that's being discussed about. When you find
>> problems you report them, or help fix them. You don't attack the person
>> working on them.
>>
>> > The correct course of action would have been a vote about stoping the
>> > merges or a change to the procedure to reduce the amount of bugs.
>> > Like maybe a seperate branch where merges can be tested for ~24h before
>> > being pushed to master ...
>> > Or maybe more people working on fixing regressions
>> > As a sidenote, most of the regressions should be fixed by now.
>> >
>> > 2. ban derek for ~24h from the ML due to causing lukasz to leave the
>> > project last year, and due to personal insults on the ML and IRC
>> > to lukasz and carl.
>> > As derek is not subscribed to the list ATM, this will be implemented
>> > by moving him from the accept_these_nonmembers list to the
>> > reject_these_nonmembers list for ~24h
>> >
>> > 3. ban myself for ~24h from the ML because i wrote offensive mails too
>> > years ago and i doubt none was pivotal in causing someone to leave
>>
>> And this is silly. It's old history and nobody requested such action in
>> any what whatsoever. It will only derail the discussion and again, bans
>> without discussion or vote are a big no.
>
> It may be unimportant but the "ban" would never have stopped derek from
> subscribing or subsequently posting a message.
>
> [...]
>
> --
> Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
>
> I have often repented speaking, but never of holding my tongue.
> -- Xenocrates
>
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] bans

[compn]

On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 15:21:47 +0200
Michael Niedermayer  wrote:

> I agree but if i do nothing people are unhappy that i did nothing,
> if i talk with people trying to resolve a conflict well, it did not
> work this time. and if i do something else people complain too.

you tried. thanks for trying.

why is no one happy?

-compn
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] bans

[compn]

On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 00:56:28 -0300
James Almer  wrote:

> I don't think i called him names but if you think i did and violated

>>You'll get inside a spiral of bullshit with no
>>end until you decide to stop feeding the troll disguised as worried
>>contributor.

you did call him a troll. :D

> the CoC then you're welcome to call a vote for whatever action you

nah, i actually dont give a shit. i'm for free speech, not nonsense
censorship. :)

-compn
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] bans

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:50:51AM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> On 6/15/2016 10:14 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > Hi all
> > 
> > As noone is doing anything about the situation and what is being
> > done will not lead anywhere (the vote likely wont lead anywhere as
> > likely few would ban a active developer 4 month and then if not
> > some will feel injustice prevailed thus
> > 
> > After writing this mail i will
> > 
> > 1. ban carl for 24h from the ML due to
> > causing  derek to leave the project. (24h was suggested in the IRC
> > meeting)
> 
> This is useless IMO. While four months is too much, 24 hours is
> insignificant.
> 

> Let's not implement bans without a discussion and a vote first.

I agree but if i do nothing people are unhappy that i did nothing,
if i talk with people trying to resolve a conflict well, it did not
work this time. and if i do something else people complain too.
and its 4 weeks since the incident.
Doing some symbolic action seemed to make sense until the people
finish discussions and votes.
I belive i do not have the authority to hand out real (week+) bans,
nor would i want that authorithy. Also i will stay away
from symbolic bans too, this was intended to improve the situation,
and i belive it did not achive that.


> The current vote will probably go nowhere, so a proper discussion thread
> followed by a vote will have to be made.

Yes,
its up to the vote comittee and the community to decide what should
be done.


> 
> > I suspect carl saw the merges done by derek as causing more bugs than
> > good so he attacked until derek stoped doing the merges.
> 
> Which is the shitty behavior that's being discussed about. When you find
> problems you report them, or help fix them. You don't attack the person
> working on them.
> 
> > The correct course of action would have been a vote about stoping the
> > merges or a change to the procedure to reduce the amount of bugs.
> > Like maybe a seperate branch where merges can be tested for ~24h before
> > being pushed to master ...
> > Or maybe more people working on fixing regressions
> > As a sidenote, most of the regressions should be fixed by now.
> > 
> > 2. ban derek for ~24h from the ML due to causing lukasz to leave the
> > project last year, and due to personal insults on the ML and IRC
> > to lukasz and carl.
> > As derek is not subscribed to the list ATM, this will be implemented
> > by moving him from the accept_these_nonmembers list to the
> > reject_these_nonmembers list for ~24h
> > 
> > 3. ban myself for ~24h from the ML because i wrote offensive mails too
> > years ago and i doubt none was pivotal in causing someone to leave
> 
> And this is silly. It's old history and nobody requested such action in
> any what whatsoever. It will only derail the discussion and again, bans
> without discussion or vote are a big no.

It may be uninportant but the "ban" would never have stoped derek from
subscribing or subsequently posting a message.

[...]

-- 
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

I have often repented speaking, but never of holding my tongue.
-- Xenocrates


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] bans

[Ivan Kalvachev]

On 6/16/16, James Almer  wrote:
> On 6/15/2016 8:16 PM, Ivan Kalvachev wrote:
>>Loads of crap
>
> No one, and i mean no one reply to this email.
>
> You will not get a single answer to any question you make. All you'll get is
> counter questions. He will make questions he knows the answers for only to
> read the reply in your own words. And once you reply to said questions, your
> answer will be nitpicked expecting you to focus on said comments until the
> conversation is fully derailed.
> Insisting with your questions will be useless.
>
> This is the guy that in a reply to the vote thread said he wasn't aware the
> subject was mentioned in the IRC meeting [1] while in reality he knew well
> about everything and even acknowledged it, as pointed out by Ronald in a
> subsequent email [2].
> He will lie and he will pretend to be unaware of things, be it to not answer
> your questions or to get you to reply his, starting the cycle i mentioned
> above.
>
> This is is a guy that has since day 1 derailed every single conversation and
> tried to put the aggressor as the victim and the victim as the aggressor,
> installing the idea of secret unjustified feuds and invoking old bullshit
> like
> libav's debacle in a perfect godwin's law fashion.
>
> Not a single discussion in IRC where he was involved went anywhere, and
> neither
> will anything in this thread. You'll get inside a spiral of bullshit with no
> end until you decide to stop feeding the troll disguised as worried
> contributor.
>
> [1] https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-June/195306.html
> [2] https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-June/195344.html

Too late, you already replied and you have demonstrated practically
the things I've described in the mail.
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] bans

[James Almer]

On 6/16/2016 12:27 AM, compn wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:21:28 -0300
> James Almer  wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
> you are aware that we have voted in a code of conduct.[1]
> 
> you may want to review it, again.
> 
> https://ffmpeg.org/developer.html#Code-of-conduct
> 
> calling developers names will not be tolerated.

I made a list of what you can expect from any kind of exchange with
him to save both people's time and sanity, and even linked to a very
recent example of this kind of behavior to show I'm not just making
things up.

I don't think i called him names but if you think i did and violated
the CoC then you're welcome to call a vote for whatever action you
think should be taken. This entire situation is so distorted and
derailed among other things by what i denounced and warned about that
at this point i don't know what to expect of it.
Or rather, i know i shouldn't expect any concrete and logic action
whatsoever being taken at all.

> 
> -compn
> 
> [1] http://lists.ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-May/194529.html
> ___
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
> 

___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] bans

[compn]

On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:21:28 -0300
James Almer  wrote:

...

you are aware that we have voted in a code of conduct.[1]

you may want to review it, again.

https://ffmpeg.org/developer.html#Code-of-conduct

calling developers names will not be tolerated.

-compn

[1] http://lists.ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-May/194529.html
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] bans

[jd1008]

for what it's worth, I have been met with similar issue on this list.
Very unfortunate, and the principals are not doing anything about it.


On 06/15/2016 06:21 PM, James Almer wrote:

On 6/15/2016 8:16 PM, Ivan Kalvachev wrote:

Loads of crap

No one, and i mean no one reply to this email.

You will not get a single answer to any question you make. All you'll get is
counter questions. He will make questions he knows the answers for only to
read the reply in your own words. And once you reply to said questions, your
answer will be nitpicked expecting you to focus on said comments until the
conversation is fully derailed.
Insisting with your questions will be useless.

This is the guy that in a reply to the vote thread said he wasn't aware the
subject was mentioned in the IRC meeting [1] while in reality he knew well
about everything and even acknowledged it, as pointed out by Ronald in a
subsequent email [2].
He will lie and he will pretend to be unaware of things, be it to not answer
your questions or to get you to reply his, starting the cycle i mentioned
above.

This is is a guy that has since day 1 derailed every single conversation and
tried to put the aggressor as the victim and the victim as the aggressor,
installing the idea of secret unjustified feuds and invoking old bullshit like
libav's debacle in a perfect godwin's law fashion.

Not a single discussion in IRC where he was involved went anywhere, and neither
will anything in this thread. You'll get inside a spiral of bullshit with no
end until you decide to stop feeding the troll disguised as worried contributor.

[1] https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-June/195306.html
[2] https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-June/195344.html
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel


___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] bans

[James Almer]

On 6/15/2016 8:16 PM, Ivan Kalvachev wrote:
>Loads of crap

No one, and i mean no one reply to this email.

You will not get a single answer to any question you make. All you'll get is
counter questions. He will make questions he knows the answers for only to
read the reply in your own words. And once you reply to said questions, your
answer will be nitpicked expecting you to focus on said comments until the
conversation is fully derailed.
Insisting with your questions will be useless.

This is the guy that in a reply to the vote thread said he wasn't aware the
subject was mentioned in the IRC meeting [1] while in reality he knew well
about everything and even acknowledged it, as pointed out by Ronald in a
subsequent email [2].
He will lie and he will pretend to be unaware of things, be it to not answer
your questions or to get you to reply his, starting the cycle i mentioned
above.

This is is a guy that has since day 1 derailed every single conversation and
tried to put the aggressor as the victim and the victim as the aggressor,
installing the idea of secret unjustified feuds and invoking old bullshit like
libav's debacle in a perfect godwin's law fashion.

Not a single discussion in IRC where he was involved went anywhere, and neither
will anything in this thread. You'll get inside a spiral of bullshit with no
end until you decide to stop feeding the troll disguised as worried contributor.

[1] https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-June/195306.html
[2] https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-June/195344.html
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] bans

[Ivan Kalvachev]

On 6/15/16, Michael Niedermayer  wrote:
> Hi all
>
> As noone is doing anything about the situation and what is being
> done will not lead anywhere (the vote likely wont lead anywhere as
> likely few would ban a active developer 4 month and then if not
> some will feel injustice prevailed thus
>
> After writing this mail i will
>
> 1. ban carl for 24h from the ML due to
> causing  derek to leave the project. (24h was suggested in the IRC
> meeting)
> I suspect carl saw the merges done by derek as causing more bugs than
> good so he attacked until derek stoped doing the merges.
> The correct course of action would have been a vote about stoping the
> merges or a change to the procedure to reduce the amount of bugs.
> Like maybe a seperate branch where merges can be tested for ~24h before
> being pushed to master ...
> Or maybe more people working on fixing regressions
> As a sidenote, most of the regressions should be fixed by now.
>
> 2. ban derek for ~24h from the ML due to causing lukasz to leave the
> project last year, and due to personal insults on the ML and IRC
> to lukasz and carl.
> As derek is not subscribed to the list ATM, this will be implemented
> by moving him from the accept_these_nonmembers list to the
> reject_these_nonmembers list for ~24h
>
> 3. ban myself for ~24h from the ML because i wrote offensive mails too
> years ago and i doubt none was pivotal in causing someone to leave
>
> Thanks

I don't think that these bans would change anything.


The problem is that they would not address
any of the reasons for getting here.

There's been accumulation of a lot of mud,
and what we have seen so far is not even
the tip of the iceberg.

There are people who sincerely believe that
FFmpeg project would be better without Carl.
That Carl hates LibAV project and that hate is
obstruction to the consolidation between the
two projects.

The negativity turns into hostility and provocations.

When Carl complains that some merge breaks FFmpeg,
he is viewed as attacking LibAV and the merger,
even when he is actually only concerned about bugs in FFmpeg.
Then some people think they are in their right to counterattack.

Somebody described the result as:
"it's years of build up displeasure about
the general behavior of a person."

How do you resolve that?

I have no idea.

People don't remember facts, they remember emotions.
And people refuse to acknowledge making mistake,
rejecting any arguments, based on facts and logic.

This basically means that things would only get worse.
Derek's dramatic departure put quite a pain in hearths of
the people who consider him a friend.
They would not forgive Carl for that.



For these who are relatively new to the project,
the same crisis has happened before in FFmpeg,
but with different people.

It was Mans who left FFmpeg, because of Michael's
alleged violations of rules and savage behavior.
There was a vote to keep or kick Michael and the vote kept him.
Things then got silent for few months, until Mans returned by
takeover of FFmpeg project and servers, supported by
a big portion of developers and the other admins.

Takeover at the moment is not really plausible,
since the admins won't support it.

What is plausible is that hostility would remain.
There will be more incidents involving Carl,
some people would push for stricter punishments.

Likely outcomes are:
1. Carl leaves on his own.
2. Carl is banned permanently.
3. Derek friends leave FFmpeg one by one.
4. Derek friends fork FFmpeg.

The first two variants does look like they are
going to be best for FFmpeg, however things
are never this simple. Once Carl is gone,
hostility would be directed to anybody who
opposes in any way the friends circle.

What happened to lukasz, would happen
to a lot more developers and contributors.

This would inevitably lead to stagnation,
lack of manpower, lack of new features,
increase in bugs, long delays in handling security exploits.
All things that are quite common in LibAV project
and also some of main reasons for FFmpeg
replacing it in Debian.
After all, this is how LibAV came to be,
as a circle of friends who got rid of
undesirable developer(s).


So what do you really want?

Do you want to ruin FFmpeg? Because that's how you ruin a project.
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] bans

[Felt, Patrick]

On 6/15/16, 7:50 AM, "ffmpeg-devel on behalf of James Almer" 
 wrote:

>On 6/15/2016 10:14 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> After writing this mail i will
>> 
>> 1. ban carl for 24h from the ML due to
>> causing  derek to leave the project. (24h was suggested in the IRC
>> meeting)
>
>This is useless IMO. While four months is too much, 24 hours is
>insignificant.

Might I throw in an exponential backoff algorithm?  Perhaps every incident 
incurs a 24 hour ban with a one month half-life or some such thing.  Once a 
person passes above a 24h ban they are actually banned for some time.  It’s 
worked for BGP for a lot of years.

>
>> 2. ban derek for ~24h from the ML
>> 
>> 3. ban myself for ~24h from the ML

>And this is silly. It's old history and nobody requested such action in
>any what whatsoever. It will only derail the discussion and again, bans
>without discussion or vote are a big no.
>

I also think all the current bans are silly.  Retroactively applying rules that 
were voted on today to issues that happened in the past, for any value of past, 
is not something that I think is appropriate.  What’s happened on all fronts is 
a horrible shame, but it seems that a consistent set of rules going forward and 
water under the bridge presently is a better way to go of it.  Don’t we all 
have better things to do that squabble over this?  I see a lot of amazing stuff 
coming in patches.



___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] bans

[Reto Kromer]

Michael Niedermayer wrote:

>1. ban carl for 24h

>2. ban derek for ~24h

>3. ban myself for ~24h

May I suggest to stop the Kindergarten for the next 24
years?

Kindest regards, Reto

___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] bans

[James Almer]

On 6/15/2016 10:14 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi all
> 
> As noone is doing anything about the situation and what is being
> done will not lead anywhere (the vote likely wont lead anywhere as
> likely few would ban a active developer 4 month and then if not
> some will feel injustice prevailed thus
> 
> After writing this mail i will
> 
> 1. ban carl for 24h from the ML due to
> causing  derek to leave the project. (24h was suggested in the IRC
> meeting)

This is useless IMO. While four months is too much, 24 hours is
insignificant.

Let's not implement bans without a discussion and a vote first.
The current vote will probably go nowhere, so a proper discussion thread
followed by a vote will have to be made.

> I suspect carl saw the merges done by derek as causing more bugs than
> good so he attacked until derek stoped doing the merges.

Which is the shitty behavior that's being discussed about. When you find
problems you report them, or help fix them. You don't attack the person
working on them.

> The correct course of action would have been a vote about stoping the
> merges or a change to the procedure to reduce the amount of bugs.
> Like maybe a seperate branch where merges can be tested for ~24h before
> being pushed to master ...
> Or maybe more people working on fixing regressions
> As a sidenote, most of the regressions should be fixed by now.
> 
> 2. ban derek for ~24h from the ML due to causing lukasz to leave the
> project last year, and due to personal insults on the ML and IRC
> to lukasz and carl.
> As derek is not subscribed to the list ATM, this will be implemented
> by moving him from the accept_these_nonmembers list to the
> reject_these_nonmembers list for ~24h
> 
> 3. ban myself for ~24h from the ML because i wrote offensive mails too
> years ago and i doubt none was pivotal in causing someone to leave

And this is silly. It's old history and nobody requested such action in
any what whatsoever. It will only derail the discussion and again, bans
without discussion or vote are a big no.

> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
> 

___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

[FFmpeg-devel] bans

[Michael Niedermayer]

Hi all

As noone is doing anything about the situation and what is being
done will not lead anywhere (the vote likely wont lead anywhere as
likely few would ban a active developer 4 month and then if not
some will feel injustice prevailed thus

After writing this mail i will

1. ban carl for 24h from the ML due to
causing  derek to leave the project. (24h was suggested in the IRC
meeting)
I suspect carl saw the merges done by derek as causing more bugs than
good so he attacked until derek stoped doing the merges.
The correct course of action would have been a vote about stoping the
merges or a change to the procedure to reduce the amount of bugs.
Like maybe a seperate branch where merges can be tested for ~24h before
being pushed to master ...
Or maybe more people working on fixing regressions
As a sidenote, most of the regressions should be fixed by now.

2. ban derek for ~24h from the ML due to causing lukasz to leave the
project last year, and due to personal insults on the ML and IRC
to lukasz and carl.
As derek is not subscribed to the list ATM, this will be implemented
by moving him from the accept_these_nonmembers list to the
reject_these_nonmembers list for ~24h

3. ban myself for ~24h from the ML because i wrote offensive mails too
years ago and i doubt none was pivotal in causing someone to leave

Thanks

-- 
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated
form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty. -- Plato


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel