-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Mark Little wrote: > >> 1) ASF is a meritocracy. > > And people learn by questioning, not by being passive observers!
Actually, I think that's patently false. You never learned anything from a book? Or a lecture? Or a discussion? And people gain merit by doing, not by learning. The learning comes first, naturally. :-) > And everyone makes mistakes (including you, myself and people in > Apache). To believe otherwise is to not live in the real world. True enough. > To not question others is to live in a totalitarian regime. No, that's when you're not *allowed* to question. Being able to but not doing so is of debatable utility. Assuming you're right without asking questions, in opposition to others with more experience in the subject, is likewise typically suboptimal. > So let's try to take this to some "logical" conclusion: you're saying > that just because person A says something that person B disagrees > with, person B should then accept that because person A is somehow > more experienced? I don't think that's Leo's point. I suspect the one he's trying to make is that the above is a perfect opportunity to ask those questions you mentioned, rather than dogmatically assuming irreducible incompatibility. Of course, you might want to check your facts. :-) > Even factoring experience in (and experience ranges across a lot of > different areas, and I admit to being lacking in Apache experience > compared to many others, but certainly not lacking in the field of > computing), that's a crazy way to think. 'Even factoring in?' Leo's whole point is about experience; it's not something to be 'factored into' the discussion with him. And experience with Apache is the issue here, not general industry-wide credentials. And I don't think it's particularly crazy for someone who is less-experienced to provisionally assume a more-experienced person is correct when there's a difference of opinion. Would you argue with a haematologist about the meaning of rouleaux formations in a blood sample, even if you're a qualified dermatologist? Or would you perhaps assume he knew what he was talking about, and maybe ask questions about the subject? > I'm sorry but I don't recall reading in any of the Apache literature > that a frontal lobotomy was a pre-requisite to joining! That's more than a little over the top. I doubt remarks like that are going to help foster community and peer relationships. > So lemmings are the kind of individuals you want in Apache? People > who just follow without questioning? More of the same, alas. > I think your comments show a level of naivete and to be honest, are > uncalled for. I hope you won't be surprised or insulted if anyone extends you the same courtesy. > Processes (governments, corporate, open source etc.) grown and evolve > because people question them and push the boundaries. I think the > original point of this thread was such a push. If so, I respectfully suggest that you might consider finding a different way of expressing yourself. This one seems to have polarised some people against you. And that's something that can laid wholly at their doors; you need to take some responsibility for it as well. >> That mindset somehow tends to start with "the people around me are >> trying to do the Right Thing", if you can't bring yourself around >> to that world view, you might as well look for a more productive >> environment right now. > > Huh? OK, so you obviously live in some alternative reality to the > real world ;-) I'm happy to take this offline, because it is no > longer relevant to this discussion. I disagree. Leo's remark is spot-on and highly relevant. If you are not interested in learning how things are done at the ASF, and choose to assume axiomatically you know better than the people who have been there for years, then you shouldn't be here. CeltixFire will not succeed here without fitting into the Apache milieu. Variety is welcomed; fundamental and incompatible differences of view are not. >> Secondly, I suggest you learn, and learn right now, to stop writing >> things along the lines of ``is random denial of initial committers >> typical?'' or ``I've used the Redhat/JBoss example already, > > Get off your soapbox and stop trying to make this personal. To the > best of my knowledge, until this email this entire thread was not > personal. It was about people trying to figure out the right thing to > do in a complex situation. I think Leo was saying, in his blunt way, the same thing I did above: intentional or not, your manner of expression is not regarded by some as conducive to friendly discourse. > Well if you're ever willing to enter into a reasoned discussion about > this as everyone else appears to be, let me know. Until then I'll > treat this email as static. You might want to check your facts. - -- #ken P-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQCVAwUBRSa95JrNPMCpn3XdAQLcsQQA0RbzsZ44vI4LICSGUDZcaPwNgcw5I/0K 2o97gOkM01FSYiXxpo1oltiPtLy70QPavgVgIAXrTAVW/9onssfxoWLnrt+8fbCy 02FUD0BThLTEnzcfTdKmYBwZZ1N1qUlb4A8EVYowOMvD+VqIE+CUWgtsDKFOods2 gnqJHPfLQTA= =Q8eJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
