Re: [Python-ideas] OT: Respectful behaviour
On 11/03/2019 15:37, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 2:30 AM Jonathan Fine wrote: Someone made a proposal whose purpose was not clear. A second person criticised the first person for this. A third person (me) referred to the public guidelines for the use of this list. A fourth person, in a new thread, accused the third person of hijacking the thread. The third person (me) responded, with the previous remarks. TBH your link to the public guidelines was not quite a response to the second post, as the second post was talking about *content* and you were talking about *behaviour*. It's perfectly possible to remain entirely within the Code of Conduct, but still not provide enough context for the post; it's also entirely possible to make a post that has all sorts of useful information, but is caustic, rude, racist, sexist, or in any other way violates the CoC. The former is perfectly legitimate content, but will result in an on-topic response asking for more details; the latter might get you banned from the list. That said, though - I don't think Rhodri's response was really necessary here. Calling your post "unrelated" is stretching it a bit, and it wasn't an inconsiderate post, just not quite a direct response. *shrug* Had Jonathan retitled his post to be clear he was not addressing the original issue (the first unclear post), I wouldn't have had an issue with it. However he didn't, and his post wasn't on the subject (or attempting to clarify the subject) of the the first post. In a post talking about respect and good conduct, that's quite a failing. In my opinion, obviously. -- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd ___ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
Re: [Python-ideas] OT: Respectful behaviour
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 2:30 AM Jonathan Fine wrote: > > Someone made a proposal whose purpose was not clear. A second person > criticised the first person for this. A third person (me) referred to > the public guidelines for the use of this list. A fourth person, in a > new thread, accused the third person of hijacking the thread. The > third person (me) responded, with the previous remarks. TBH your link to the public guidelines was not quite a response to the second post, as the second post was talking about *content* and you were talking about *behaviour*. It's perfectly possible to remain entirely within the Code of Conduct, but still not provide enough context for the post; it's also entirely possible to make a post that has all sorts of useful information, but is caustic, rude, racist, sexist, or in any other way violates the CoC. The former is perfectly legitimate content, but will result in an on-topic response asking for more details; the latter might get you banned from the list. That said, though - I don't think Rhodri's response was really necessary here. Calling your post "unrelated" is stretching it a bit, and it wasn't an inconsiderate post, just not quite a direct response. *shrug* ChrisA ___ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
Re: [Python-ideas] OT: Respectful behaviour
Someone made a proposal whose purpose was not clear. A second person criticised the first person for this. A third person (me) referred to the public guidelines for the use of this list. A fourth person, in a new thread, accused the third person of hijacking the thread. The third person (me) responded, with the previous remarks. Silence, sometimes, is golden. Or at least better than the alternative. -- Jonatha ___ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
[Python-ideas] OT: Respectful behaviour
On 11/03/2019 12:17, Jonathan Fine wrote: Steven D'Aprano wrote: Some weeks ago, you started a discussion here about "Clearer Communication". Here's another suggestion to help: don't expect your readers to either guess, or infer from the code, what your proposal means. As the Zen of Python says: Explicit is better than implicit. For me, the canonical guidelines for the use of this list are [1] http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ Summary: Open, Considerate, Respectful May I suggest that hijacking a thread to discuss something unrelated at length is neither considerate nor respectful? ASIDE The system puts the first two URLs at the foot of every email it sends out. It might help if it also added https://devguide.python.org/ I'll suggest that to the forum moderators. That makes it sound like we're all core developers, which would be a considerable discouragement to discussion. I would expect that the core devs actually know this already, and reminding them at every turn is rather insulting. -- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd ___ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
