On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 11:59:21PM +0100, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
[...]
> And, as I already told too in other mail threads that you are quite
> efficient at interpreting what people wrote to you the worst possible
> way [...]
> Whether it's intentional or not, I'm still wondering, although
Felix Lechner wrote on 21/02/2022 at 19:10:08+0100:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 10:06 AM Russ Allbery wrote:
>>
>> Right now, you are doing exactly what Enrico described: creating
>> conflict where there was none.
>
> I think you are blowing it out of proportion. There is no conflict but
On Monday, February 21, 2022 4:09:37 PM EST Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Scott" == Scott Kitterman writes:
> Scott> OTOH, I think a DAM warning for a single instance of someone
> Scott> losing their temper and calling someone an unfortunate name
> Scott> is like ringing a doorbell with
Sam Hartman wrote:
> I agree that Debian has committed to being open and inclusive. However, for
> me that means something different than you say in your second sentence. To
> me that means we've committed to being open to as large a cross section of
> people--as diverse a cross section of
> "Scott" == Scott Kitterman writes:
Scott> OTOH, I think a DAM warning for a single instance of someone
Scott> losing their temper and calling someone an unfortunate name
Scott> is like ringing a doorbell with a sledge hammer.
I strongly agree. And I understand why it is that
On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:03 PM Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
> On Sunday, February 20, 2022 5:24:47 PM EST Sam Hartman wrote:
> > > "Felix" == Felix Lechner writes:
> > In the interest of full disclosure, I no longer have any affiliation
> > with DAM.
> >
> > Felix> With regard to
I've been posting a lot on back and forth philosophical discussions, from
which it's probably hard to extract a clear idea of what I'm arguing for.
I've also gotten a few things entirely backwards, and understand a few
things better than before the discussion. So in the interest of trying to
make
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 01:08:42PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> OTOH, I think a DAM warning for a single instance of someone losing their
> temper and calling someone an unfortunate name is like ringing a doorbell
> with
> a sledge hammer. If that's now the standard for threatening removal,
On Monday, February 21, 2022 1:05:04 PM EST Russ Allbery wrote:
> Felix Lechner writes:
> > On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 9:38 AM Enrico Zini wrote:
> >> Then you need to start taking responsibility for creating conflict when
> >> there was none, which is sadly something I see as a recurring pattern
>
Felix Lechner writes:
> Your statement is the opposite of what I felt. In fact, I asked for the
> circumstances to be published on debian-private. It was calming to me,
> so your interpretation is not correct.
Thank you for the correction! I'm sorry for having misunderstood you.
You'd made
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 10:06 AM Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> Right now, you are doing exactly what Enrico described: creating
> conflict where there was none.
I think you are blowing it out of proportion. There is no conflict but
a diversity of opinion.
Kind regards
Felix Lechner
On Monday, February 21, 2022 12:33:55 PM EST Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > The reason it feels like a threat of expulsion is precisely because it
> > is a threat of expulsion. The minimal possible solution to people
> > feeling threatened would be to not threaten them. That
Felix Lechner writes:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 9:38 AM Enrico Zini wrote:
>> Then you need to start taking responsibility for creating conflict when
>> there was none, which is sadly something I see as a recurring pattern
>> in the way you participate in Debian interactions.
>> Is this
Hi Steve
Thanks for putting together this summary!
I'd like for us to channel our discussions into something that can lead
to positive actions, and relatively soon, rather than it dragging on too
long and then fizzing out as it has happened in the past.
Some of the deep dive discussions oh
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 9:06 AM Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> That is precisely the opposite of what I meant.
Thank you for clarifying.
> What I'm trying to express is that the warning *entirely reasonably* made
> you feel shamed and attacked for a number of reasons, including the fact
> that it
Marc Haber writes:
> But please don't forget that a person vanishing from a heated discussion
> just in a whim creates the feeling of victory in the orht discussion
> parties.
> And I KNOW what I would do as participant of a heated discussion after
> receiving a DAM warning.
I think the way
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 08:51:51AM -0800, Felix Lechner wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 8:29 AM Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >
> > This is getting worrying. Russ expressed sympathy about the bad
> > effects that warnings could have on people, and you've somehow
> > misinterpreted that as a direct
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 9:38 AM Enrico Zini wrote:
>
> Then you need to start taking responsibility for creating conflict when
> there was none, which is sadly something I see as a recurring pattern in
> the way you participate in Debian interactions.
>
> Is this something you'd acknowledge
Scott Kitterman writes:
> The reason it feels like a threat of expulsion is precisely because it
> is a threat of expulsion. The minimal possible solution to people
> feeling threatened would be to not threaten them. That may not be
> enough, but that would be a first step. Focusing on the
On February 21, 2022 5:02:37 PM UTC, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Felix Lechner writes:
>> On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:43 PM Russ Allbery wrote:
>
>>> Or, let me put this another way: one of the fears that I've seen
>>> expressed around warnings is that it's a permanent record sort of
>>> thing, or
Felix Lechner writes:
> On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:43 PM Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Or, let me put this another way: one of the fears that I've seen
>> expressed around warnings is that it's a permanent record sort of
>> thing, or it starts a file on someone, or otherwise creates a
>> presumption
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 8:29 AM Steve McIntyre wrote:
>
> This is getting worrying. Russ expressed sympathy about the bad
> effects that warnings could have on people, and you've somehow
> misinterpreted that as a direct attack on you.
Thank you, but despite your condescending tone I retain
Felix...
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 07:25:46AM -0800, Felix Lechner wrote:
>On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:43 PM Russ Allbery wrote:
>>
>> Or, let me put this another way: one of the fears that I've seen expressed
>> around warnings is that it's a permanent record sort of thing, or it
>> starts a file
On 2022/02/21 16:40, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On February 21, 2022 12:56:43 PM UTC, Jonathan Carter wrote:
On 2022/02/21 14:40, Scott Kitterman wrote:
I didn't intend to communicate that it was a final step. I think we agree. A
DAM warning, as you said, indicates someone is on a path to
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 7:28 AM Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> In my model, the bar for excluding an individual, particularly at the
> beginning is very low.
>
> * We expect people to agree to the social contract.
> That's a big exclusion; a lot of people don't care about those
> principles.
>
> *
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:43 PM Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> Or, let me put this another way: one of the fears that I've seen expressed
> around warnings is that it's a permanent record sort of thing, or it
> starts a file on someone, or otherwise creates a presumption of future bad
> behavior.
> "Gerardo" == Gerardo Ballabio writes:
Gerardo> Debian is a community that strives to be open, fair and
Gerardo> inclusive. That means that we have made a commitment to
Gerardo> welcome everybody and not exclude anyone without good
Gerardo> reasons.
I agree that Debian has
On February 21, 2022 12:56:43 PM UTC, Jonathan Carter wrote:
>On 2022/02/21 14:40, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> I didn't intend to communicate that it was a final step. I think we agree.
>> A DAM warning, as you said, indicates someone is on a path to suspension or
>> expulsion. I don't have
On 2022/02/21 14:40, Scott Kitterman wrote:
I didn't intend to communicate that it was a final step. I think we agree. A
DAM warning, as you said, indicates someone is on a path to suspension or
expulsion. I don't have a problem with this. What bothers me is trying to
pretend it's
On February 21, 2022 11:33:07 AM UTC, Jonathan Carter wrote:
>On 2022/02/21 07:06, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> Currently a DAM warning is a suspension/expulsion with deferred execution.
>
>I don't believe that's quite accurate, a DAM warning isn't necessarily
>meant as a final warning, it's a
On 2022/02/21 07:06, Scott Kitterman wrote:
Currently a DAM warning is a suspension/expulsion with deferred execution.
I don't believe that's quite accurate, a DAM warning isn't necessarily
meant as a final warning, it's a larger prod for an individual to course
correct their behaviour.
If
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 09:18:15AM +0100, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Russ Allbery wrote on 21/02/2022 at 07:30:48+0100:
> > BTW, also on that front, I think that announcing DAM warnings to the
> > project is a serious mistake. I understand the thought process that went
> > into that decision,
Sam Hartman wrote:
> I think phrasing this in terms of justice and rights for keeping
governments accountable is likely to get a knee-jerk reaction from a
number of people who do not want to think of things that.
> It's fairly clear to a number of us that maintaining standards of a
private
Russ Allbery wrote:
> We need a careful and slow process for kicking someone out of the project
because that's a big deal. Having a careful and slow process for issuing
a warning is faintly absurd,
I see your point and to some extent I agree -- but if repeated
warnings then become grounds for
Russ Allbery wrote on 21/02/2022 at 07:30:48+0100:
> BTW, also on that front, I think that announcing DAM warnings to the
> project is a serious mistake. I understand the thought process that went
> into that decision, but I really don't agree with it. The effect is to
> make someone feel
35 matches
Mail list logo
