On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 9:55 AM, Robert Samuel Newson <rnew...@apache.org>wrote:
> > +1 to all that, Noah. I can only imagine what this looks like to casual > readers. > > Few things require unanimity and this is not one of them. > > The reason I've stayed quiet on the proposal is that while I don't feel > strongly for it, I don't feel strongly against it. It's not my time or > effort being expended, and I applaud when others expend effort to help our > project. > > To see so many threads crash in the same way, still, is very upsetting. > Benoit, when you do this, I generally just archive the thread and stop > contributing. It's tiresome. > > B. > I am not surprised. I am off course the bad and hostile guy always in disagreement, always reverting its position. Which is untrue. I of couse accept the decision of most even if I disagree. This is the power of a democracy. But beeing in disagreeement sometimes is not beeing hostile. If nothing can be discussed then fine, let's supposed that concensus = silent acceptation from the mass and forget little voices that express themselves. This is indeed quite easier to handle. Now consider how this is hostile for the little voice that express when the only response you get in these threads is , oh the silent acceptation is enough, and anyway I don't need it to continue what I wanted to do. This is just as saying, i am just launching the thread, but in reality I am not looking for any consulting, just looking for people that are following me. This is were the hostility is and this is what can put people out of voice. I didn't disagree about any marketing action in that thread. I also didn't disagree at all. I objected to the creation of a new mailing-list when it came in a discussion and gave my reasons for. I had no response to the reasons I have gave (a "I read you" is not a response). In return to my objections i was categorised about beeing hostile, and beeing an action blocker, ... . Thank you. - benoit
