It is sometimes the case that the individual, with power in the community, can't work with another 'in his eyes difficult' person.
If his contributions are beneficial to the project, if others in the project can work with that second person in the collegia/civil manner that is expected in a communityl, how can it be acceptable that that first person (the one with power who can't work with the other) can block acceptance with a veto. Voting against is not the same as vetoing! Suppose one of you (with power) finds me 'difficult' within this community (as this community is somewhat similar to any other ASF project). And suppose I get nominated as PMC member, because of my good contributions and of my ability to work with many others. How would a veto (to have me in) inspire me to do more for the greater good, but in stead lead to cycles towards being a loss for this community? Vetoing people isn't a community builder. It doesn't help when it comes to collaborating. It doesn't help when it comes to diversifying the community. Best regards, Pierre Smits *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* Services & Solutions for Cloud- Based Manufacturing, Professional Services and Retail & Trade http://www.orrtiz.com On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Marvin Humphrey <mar...@rectangular.com> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 8:29 AM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > And I emphasize 'range'. There was a talk at Apache Con some years > > back about the idea that civility goes in two directions: we all want > > to express ourselves in collegial and civil ways, and we also have to > > be prepared to accept communications from people with very different > > styles, up to and including some that we might individually find > > somewhat 'difficult.' > > It's sometimes the case that an individual has difficulty fitting into one > community, yet fits just fine within another. It's interesting to consider > how group dynamics differ. What positive conditions are present or > negative > conditions absent in the harmonious group that allow it to function > smoothly? > > In any case, there are no ideal mechanisms for resolving intractable > personnel > conflicts. The best we can do is talk through differences in the hope that > misunderstandings can be cleared or behavioral modifications adopted. > > Marvin Humphrey >
