Mailing List Archive

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:29:47 -0500
> Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
>> be a proctor directive.)
>
> He changed the subject and signed "on behalf of gentoo-proctors".
>
>> Is there a way to fix the current system, or should it be chucked
>> entirely, as has been suggested?
>
> The problem is not so much the system as a small number of the
> proctors. Perhaps it should be restaffed with people who aren't so used
> to wielding god-like powers on the forums, where anyone who dares say
> anything that disagrees with a small clique's collective views can
> be banned permanently with no accountability.
>
Thanks for your wonderful insight, No one had any idea the proctors were
a group with no accountability. When the council reviews everything
they've done in the past month, we're just joking around.

Back to reality, go take a long walk off a short pier.

--
=======================================================
Mike Doty kingtaco -at- gentoo.org
Gentoo Council
Gentoo Infrastructure
Gentoo/AMD64 Strategic Lead
GPG: E1A5 1C9C 93FE F430 C1D6 F2AF 806B A2E4 19F4 AE05
=======================================================
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 09:33:29 -0700
Mike Doty <kingtaco@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > The problem is not so much the system as a small number of the
> > proctors. Perhaps it should be restaffed with people who aren't so
> > used to wielding god-like powers on the forums, where anyone who
> > dares say anything that disagrees with a small clique's collective
> > views can be banned permanently with no accountability.
> >
> Thanks for your wonderful insight, No one had any idea the proctors
> were a group with no accountability. When the council reviews
> everything they've done in the past month, we're just joking around.

That wasn't what I said. What I said was that the forums staff have no
accountability, and that the proctors were suffering as a result of
containing too many of said forums staff.

Perhaps you should take the time to read things properly before
attempting sarcasm...

> Back to reality, go take a long walk off a short pier.

So now you're not content with filing hypocritical devrel bugs
complaining of people swearing in places you yourself regularly swear,
and are escalating the thread to ad hominem? (Note that it isn't ad
hominem if the claims are relevant to the matter at hand, so this
thread was previously ad hominem free.)

--
Ciaran McCreesh

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 09:33:29 -0700
> Mike Doty <kingtaco@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> The problem is not so much the system as a small number of the
>>> proctors. Perhaps it should be restaffed with people who aren't so
>>> used to wielding god-like powers on the forums, where anyone who
>>> dares say anything that disagrees with a small clique's collective
>>> views can be banned permanently with no accountability.
>>>
>> Thanks for your wonderful insight, No one had any idea the proctors
>> were a group with no accountability. When the council reviews
>> everything they've done in the past month, we're just joking around.
>
> That wasn't what I said. What I said was that the forums staff have no
> accountability, and that the proctors were suffering as a result of
> containing too many of said forums staff.
>
> Perhaps you should take the time to read things properly before
> attempting sarcasm...
>
Perhaps you should go take a long walk off a short pier.
>> Back to reality, go take a long walk off a short pier.
>
> So now you're not content with filing hypocritical devrel bugs
> complaining of people swearing in places you yourself regularly swear,
> and are escalating the thread to ad hominem? (Note that it isn't ad
> hominem if the claims are relevant to the matter at hand, so this
> thread was previously ad hominem free.)
>
Oh, I'm so hurt. You think I'm a hypocrite. Man, what will I ever do?
Newsflash, I know I'm a hypocrite, which is a lot better than the
childish passive-aggressive asshole you are.


--
=======================================================
Mike Doty kingtaco -at- gentoo.org
Gentoo Council
Gentoo Infrastructure
Gentoo/AMD64 Strategic Lead
GPG: E1A5 1C9C 93FE F430 C1D6 F2AF 806B A2E4 19F4 AE05
=======================================================
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Mike Doty wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:29:47 -0500
>> Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
>>> be a proctor directive.)
>> He changed the subject and signed "on behalf of gentoo-proctors".
>>
>>> Is there a way to fix the current system, or should it be chucked
>>> entirely, as has been suggested?
>> The problem is not so much the system as a small number of the
>> proctors. Perhaps it should be restaffed with people who aren't so used
>> to wielding god-like powers on the forums, where anyone who dares say
>> anything that disagrees with a small clique's collective views can
>> be banned permanently with no accountability.

<snip>

> Back to reality, go take a long walk off a short pier.
>

++
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Wednesday 06 June 2007 13:48:53 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> That wasn't what I said. What I said was that the forums staff have no
> accountability, and that the proctors were suffering as a result of
> containing too many of said forums staff.

That's bullshit. We are subject to the same rules as the other gentoo
devs/staffs. Stop spreading your FUD around (I think I said that before).

As for the forum staff in the proctors, I think that some of us could be found
in the proctors because we cared and we tried to do something to improve our
communication media (if we had any success on it, that's another discussion).
But the number of forum staff in the proctors has recently decreased, as
amne, jmbsvicetto, and myself decided to step down and leave the proctors.

Good luck for the remaining proctors, they will need as they aparently can't
even expect any support from council members.


Cheers

Pilla

On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 10:29:47AM -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> > So, how about using this incident as an opportunity for a calm
> > discussion about the mandate and role of the proctors? The proctors
> > clearly felt that they should shut down this thread _before_ things
> > got out of hand.

I whole-heartedly agree with this.

It is probably safe to assume that everyone would like Gentoo to find a
system that works to prevent and/or put out flames. In the process of
figuring out the proper way, we are bound to make mistakes. We can't
expect ourselves to come up with a complete and perfect plan in advance
and live happily ever after.

Why not just assume a mistake was made when you don't agree with
something like this and then either wait for the specified period or go
to the proctors mailing list to explain how you think it could have been
better handled?

Why would an action by the proctors like this one make you want to quit
Gentoo altogether? Suppose that after discussion the proctors would
agree with you that it should have been handled differently and that
they made a mistake, would that have had a lasting effect on your
motivation? I can't imagine it would have.

On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 06:06:14PM +0200, Marien Zwart wrote:
> People really need to make up their mind about what the -dev ml *is*.
> If the proctors are not supposed to keep the discussions there mostly
> focused on technical matters and keep people from attacking each other
> (I quote again: "Clean the sand out of your pee-hole..."? does that
> really belong on a technical list like this?) then that should be made
> a lot more obvious than it currently is.

I agree that the proctors should just use their best insight to
determine if something is ok for a technical list. This will inevitably
mean that sometimes some posts will be incorrectly tagged as over the
line, but the worst that will do is to ruin a joke. Of course you'll be
annoyed that your joke was misunderstood, but for the good of the list
just suck it up and move along. It will not prevent this list from
fulfilling its purpose of being a place to discuss technical issues,
which is the most important thing if you ask me.

Regards,
Maurice.

--
Maurice van der Pot

Gentoo Linux Developer griffon26@gentoo.org http://www.gentoo.org
Creator of BiteMe! griffon26@kfk4ever.com http://www.kfk4ever.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mike Doty wrote:
> Perhaps you should go take a long walk off a short pier.
> [snip]
> Oh, I'm so hurt. You think I'm a hypocrite. Man, what will I ever do?
> Newsflash, I know I'm a hypocrite, which is a lot better than the
> childish passive-aggressive asshole you are.

Mike,

Please. You are counsel. Act like it. Stay civil. No matter what.

Marijn
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGZvJ3p/VmCx0OL2wRApAwAJ9NIyLC65mFm+ugs7FUeRgKQC2g3gCgmAN7
h0FAZ9/Eequ/zritPXNFWOk=
=pg/m
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@gentoo.org> writes:

> got out of hand. Perhaps the goal was laudable, but the methods were
> not? (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
> be a proctor directive.) Or are people really looking for the proctors
> to get involved only when behavior is particularly egregious? Is there

I find it disappointing (maybe "telling", if one is less charitable) that the
Proctors never censured the original poster for either the tone of the
message, nor the personal invective it contained, and still haven't. I'd
imagine clear violations of the CoC to result in at least a public
admonishment and warning.

--
...jsled
http://asynchronous.org/ - a=jsled; b=asynchronous.org; echo ${a}@${b}

On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
> Steev Klimaszewski <steev@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
>> could keep your fucking trap shut?
>
> If I'm asked by someone with a good reason, sure. If I'm told to by
> someone on a power trip with a history of abusing authority who's making

NeddySeagoon has a history of abusing authority? Wow...

/Anders
--
Anders Hellgren (kallamej)
Gentoo Forums Administrator
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Josh Sled wrote:
> Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@gentoo.org> writes:
>
>> got out of hand. Perhaps the goal was laudable, but the methods were
>> not? (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
>> be a proctor directive.) Or are people really looking for the proctors
>> to get involved only when behavior is particularly egregious? Is there
>
> I find it disappointing (maybe "telling", if one is less charitable) that the
> Proctors never censured the original poster for either the tone of the
> message, nor the personal invective it contained, and still haven't. I'd
> imagine clear violations of the CoC to result in at least a public
> admonishment and warning.
>
The proctors have no power now, thanks to Chris publicly stabbing them
in the back after they tried to assert some of their powers - they
requested that no one respond to the thread for 24 hours, and people
couldn't respect that simple request - and now with what Chris said, it
just fuels the flames due to Council "backing" them - as Ciaran has
already asserted in a mail earlier in the thread.

Great job Chris, way to stick it to them.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGZvmA1c+EtXTHkJcRAhgZAJ92BOAq8cd+Tp1cxXSUC8sNvw5eUwCfeOeF
Kh4cZO7lgVAleBC5s20zZmY=
=0PzG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Josh Sled wrote:
> I find it disappointing (maybe "telling", if one is less charitable) that
> the Proctors never censured the original poster for either the tone of the
> message, nor the personal invective it contained, and still haven't. I'd
> imagine clear violations of the CoC to result in at least a public
> admonishment and warning.

I feel like it was correct to adress the most pressing issue at first: An
arising flame war, which, at the time, was still manageable.
The actions which followed, namely that certain people did not abide by the
24-hour-delay, might well have made a planned warning for Benjamin Judas
drawn in flames.

Note I neither have the insight to black up my thesis, nor to proof it wrong.
I just wanted to show there might well be another side, Josh maybe didnt know
of. (By which, in turn, I dont want to claim he hasnt enough insight or
whater.) </disclaimer>
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

> drawn in flames.
drown, please excuse my spelling.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Grant Goodyear wrote:
>
> So, how about using this incident as an opportunity for a calm
> discussion about the mandate and role of the proctors?
>
> Well reasoned thoughts and opinions welcome.
>
> -g2boojum-

Benjamin Judas has probably been walking on air these past 2 days
because his troll worked so easily. Everyone here has intimate
knowledge of the ways in which mailing-lists/forums/irc work, so why do
people still insist on feeding the trolls? Let the bastards starve and
they will go away.

It's Internet #101 folks - Don't be a sucker by feeding the trolls.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

/me goes back to reading eclasses.....

- --
Jeffrey Gardner
Gentoo Developer
Public PGP Key ID: 4A5D8F23
hkp://pgpkeys.mit.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGZwyxiR2KxEpdjyMRAinaAJ9T31pcOHLbnaLIW20Dv8VlVpPSwgCdG1ti
UWDrNG1h62wLYquQlRyEVY8=
=OLN7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Dnia 06-06-2007, śro o godzinie 18:32 +0200, expose@luftgetrock.net
napisał(a):
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > expose@luftgetrock.net wrote:
> > > Just stop claiming others are insane, abusive power-trippers just
> > > because you did not abide by a rule and got your punishment for it.
> >
> > I'm claiming it because plenty of other people agree. You *did* see the
> > response that the proctors got from various Gentoo developers, right?
>
> What I saw was a response to what you as one of the I-will-reply-anyway guys
> caused, and I bet if people had just stayed quiet for 24 hours the thread
> would have died out rather quickly.
> The replys by other devs seem to be allmost exclusivly be based on the fact,
> that people like you did not take their time calming down, or if they were
> calm anyway, take their time to do whatever for 24 hours.

Why to stop the topic? IMO it *is* important, and we should make a
correct decision. You blame beejey. Ok, blame him about what he said,
but paradoxically he uncovered that whole mess, that noone was talking
about before.

++ for I-will-reply-anyway guys
--
,-----------------------------.
| Dawid Węgliński |
| cla@gentoo.org |
| cla @ irc.freenode.net |
| GPG: 295E72D9 |
`-----------------------------'

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Anders Hellgren wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
>> Steev Klimaszewski <steev@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
>>> could keep your fucking trap shut?
>>
>> If I'm asked by someone with a good reason, sure. If I'm told to by
>> someone on a power trip with a history of abusing authority who's making
>
> NeddySeagoon has a history of abusing authority? Wow...
>
> /Anders

Ciaran,

I know how much you like the forums team, but as Anders has pointed,
you're stretching too far by accusing Roy of abusing authority. With all
the due respect I have for the other forums team members, Roy is
probably the most considerate, polite and helpful individual I've ever
met online.
He's currently the top poster in the forums and although I can't claim
to have read all his posts, I have read quite a few and I've never seen
any abuse of power by him.
Everyone else, I'm sorry to add one more mail to this thread, but I
couldn't remain silent about this accusation.

- --
Regards,

Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
Gentoo- forums / Userrel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGZzXwcAWygvVEyAIRAnMlAJ0SlTTuizulwXFzU19gW25Oa1QF+QCfSzqZ
9/fxa4femkbVnYiwVVWTy7U=
=5faK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 14:08 -0300, Mauricio Lima Pilla wrote:
> Good luck for the remaining proctors, they will need as they aparently can't
> even expect any support from council members.

There's a *BIG* difference between support and blind support. Nobody
ever promised the proctors blind support.

--
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee
Gentoo Foundation

On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 13:14 -0500, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
> Great job Chris, way to stick it to them.

Yes. It absolutely *is* a great job that I voiced my opinion in a
manner that I thought was most beneficial for Gentoo. Shame on me for
ever thinking about what might be best for Gentoo. Shame on me! I
mean, we should never speak up when we think someone in authority is
doing wrong. Yeah, I really stabbed someone in the back by vocalizing
my dissenting opinion, publicly, no less. I would say that I am sorry
that certain proctors took my observations of the group as a whole
personally, but I am not. I didn't mean it to be personal, and am not
going to waste my time holding people's hands when their feelings get
hurt because I expressed my opinion. Sorry, but it just isn't going to
happen.

--
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee
Gentoo Foundation

Dawid Węgliński wrote:
> Dnia 06-06-2007, śro o godzinie 18:32 +0200, expose@luftgetrock.net
>
> napisał(a):
> > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > expose@luftgetrock.net wrote:
> > > > Just stop claiming others are insane, abusive power-trippers just
> > > > because you did not abide by a rule and got your punishment for it.
> > >
> > > I'm claiming it because plenty of other people agree. You *did* see the
> > > response that the proctors got from various Gentoo developers, right?
> >
> > What I saw was a response to what you as one of the I-will-reply-anyway
> > guys caused, and I bet if people had just stayed quiet for 24 hours the
> > thread would have died out rather quickly.
> > The replys by other devs seem to be allmost exclusivly be based on the
> > fact, that people like you did not take their time calming down, or if
> > they were calm anyway, take their time to do whatever for 24 hours.
>
> Why to stop the topic? IMO it *is* important, and we should make a
> correct decision. You blame beejey. Ok, blame him about what he said,
> but paradoxically he uncovered that whole mess, that noone was talking
> about before.
>
> ++ for I-will-reply-anyway guys

I admit that my wording is not good here, please let me rephrase it:
Instead of "thread would have died out rather quickly" read it as
"the flame-war part of the thread would have died out rather quickly"

What I tried to stress with my replies is, that there is no censorship, in
contrast to a forced slow-down.

Imagine you are angry, but may only say one sentence per hour. A verbal fight
should be harder, than it is in the world as we know it.
My own interpretation of what Roy wanted is, that he knew personal "Please
calm down everyone"-mails don't help, and therefore he wanted to force people
to do so, by delaying the thread for 24 hours.
This is not censoring, to my eyes, rather call it "de-escalation" or whatever
you like best.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list