Dear List,
> > 1. Anyone who is impolite get's kicked off.
> Who defines 'impolite'? It's a cultural thing, and given that we have
> developers and users from all over the world, we span a lot of vastly
> different cultures.
I am aware of this issue, but it is not needed to solve it at once or
perfectly.
It would be a starting point to just define the usage of words commonly used
for personally attacking someone as impolite (for instance fuck, idiot and so
on).
The definition should not reference any culture or religion as a codex that is
to be followed, and I even think that wouldnt be needed, as the definition is
something that could be developed over time.
Just try to imagine a flame war without insults, without attacking
personally - would it work? I find it hard to imagine, which is why I suggest
this as a good point to start with.
Of course one could "flame" by constantly repeating the idea is bad because of
several facts. But this is where the 2nd rule is to be applied:
> > 2. Anyone who repeatedly and seemingly on purpose tries to harm the
> > discussion will be kicked off.
> And how do you judge whether someone is deliberately trying to harm the
> discussion or is just being careless with his wording or generally
> misguided?
If someone is careless with his wording or generally misguided that often,
that it feels like it is done deliberately for the rest, thus for the
majority, where is the difference? It annoys people.
Yet I of course agree, noone should be kicked for being misguided (being
careless can be switched off), and honestly i do not currently have a
solution to avoid kicking misguided people that on the other hand does not
allow abuse. I will tell you as soon as I have an idea, and until that is the
case, I'd like to quote what "Caleb Cushing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> these are where warnings and apologies come in. plus I think only
> repeated behavior should result in permanent removal.
If you got to apologize and explain why you where misguided again and again,
you might head over to IRC and ask wether you understood it correctly, if
it's not on purpose, and if it is, you at least need alot more energy and you
have less flexibility of spreading you aggression, insults or whatever.
Sincerely,
Daniel
P.S.:
> It's nice to see someone pick up a good point and express it.
Good to know I am not the only one of that or a similar opinion.
Off-Topic at the end:
"Caleb Cushing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -- OFFTOPIC --
> --START FLAME --
> how can you write that long of a letter if you can't read and what
> does a physical illness have to do with reading?
> --END FLAME--
> sorry can't help myself.
well, think of a flu and pyrexia - at least I cannot really read a longer time
while having one, yet i can think relatively clear for a limited period of
time and thus write. Personal experiences may vary :-)
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
