On 05/26/2016 10:02 AM, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Thu, May 26, 2016 6:55 AM, Steve Dougherty st...@asksteved.com wrote: > I can understand if you're upset that Arne does not agree with you, but > I don't understand what you're doing here. Do you expect that if you > > berate Arne he will come around? > > > > > I expect that we can have a discussion based on facts and logic, during which > we > can disagree without being disagreeable, and after that discussion arrive at a > logical conclusion. This is how healthy teams operate.
That's not what was happening. > You are being disrespectful. I'm not at > all suggesting that you aren't allowed to disagree, or be honest, but > > you seem to go about being honest by also being hurtful. > > > > > I do not believe I have been disrespectful, I have stated where I disagree > with > Arne and why. Arne began his email with an ultimatum that he would not use > Google Docs to participate in the process I'm trying to create. Was that not > disrespectful of my efforts to try to create a democratic process for > prioritizing our roadmap? > Am I not permitted to criticise Arne, but it is fine for him to nitpick > relatively trivial aspects of what I'm trying to do? Yes, this is what I mean. The critical distinction here is that between Arne and Arne's ideas. Discussing the ideas is the goal. What you see as Arne's failings as a person are not relevant to what I hope can be a discussion, not a debate or argument. > I feel like you are > approaching this with the goal of shutting down those who disagree with > > you, instead of collaborating and discussing with others to arrive at a > > reasonable solution to a problem. > > > > > I'm trying to create a democratic process for prioritizing our roadmap so that > we do not squander this $25k donation. Arne appears intent on fighting me at > every step of the way, his refusal to use Google Docs being just one example. > We have now spent hours of our time debating the Google Docs issue with people > instead of advancing the project, which must be really hilarious to any > opponent > of our project that's watching us. It reminds me of the film “The Life of > Brian”, in which the People's Front of Judea are so busy fighting with the > Judean People's Front that they forget about the Romans who are supposed to be > their common enemy. > I also note Steve that you do not even try to address the substance of the > disagreement, focusing exclusively on my tone. Do you agree with Arne that we > shouldn't use Google Docs? If so, what are your reasons? I don't want to elaborate on this here because it detracts from my primary point of discussing discussion. > Can we not have a debate based on facts and arrive at a logical conclusion at > the end of that debate? That's how things used to work, and it worked pretty > well. This sounds good, and would work well if it was what happened. The mail I responded to had a reasonable first paragraph discussing the idea at hand, and then started accusations about Arne as a person. On 05/26/2016 10:27 AM, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Florent Daigniere < > nextg...@freenetproject.org> wrote: >> >> Btw, >> >> I also disagree with using google-docs; the reason being: it requires >> registration to a 3rd party service whereas the alternatives (wiki or >> piratepad) don't. >> > > In that case you will be pleased to learn that Google Docs does not > require that you sign in to a Google account unless you require this > when you create the "share" link, which I did not. > > > (Did I deliver that disagreement too harshly?). I have no objections to the tone or content of this. It discusses only the idea and does not get into how having the idea might reflect on Florent. Thank you. - Steve
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
