In this discussion it seems like there are no undecided people who can vote. This is an internal FIG issue as it relates to Paul's membership in the group. Sure everybody who was interested in the subject, now has an overview of this. Someone from FIG needs to step in and just put an end to this process and avoid having this linger indefinitely.
I am pretty sure FIG would benefit more by improving the feedback cycle for the PSR-s so that members actually get more involved in those discussions, than focusing on discussions like this. On the broader view, yes, this discussion needs to happen. It happened. I don't know Paul personally. Most of us however probably might have had an exchange or two over other mediums, which thanks to filtering and blocking mechanisms I can safely block. The general impression that was given to me was that Paul had the attitude that you rather agree with him or you are stupid, which is why I tend to avoid any exchange whatsoever because it is just time wasted. Sure, everyone can argue that diversity in opinions is needed for a structure like FIG to work properly. However, this should be diversity in opinions as it relates to how members approach the language and code in general and not diversity in approach to having healthy communities and being respectful to people. Being disrespectful and inconsiderate is not cool, is not a "voice that needs hearing", it is just plain wrong. Everyone likes a rebel, but nobody really cares about a rebel without a cause. Chronic negativity is detrimental to teams. It directly affects other members will to contribute. Many of us love the work FIG does. Many benefit from its work without even knowing FIG at all. Many of us will encounter FIG members and create an opinion based on those exchanges. It would be great if that opinion was one that encourages contribution and taking an taking a more active role in the community. To those who come here now and say that FIG is more about drama and internal conflicts, I would like to say that there are plenty of threads you can contribute on here where PSR's and ideas are discussed, but this is the one you chose to. I would also like FIG to bring this a conclusion and direct it's focus on how to improve the feedback cycle and bring in ever more contributions to the process and finding a long term solution for a striving, healthy community after this discussion comes to an end. On Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 9:53:03 PM UTC+2, Michael Cullum wrote: > > Hi all, > > Over the past 8 weeks, we [the secretaries] have had a number of voting > members, former project representatives and well known community members > alike approach us regarding a situation they believe is being detrimental > to the continued success of the FIG and the harmony in the group. It is, > essentially, the impact of Paul M Jones on the harmony of the mailing list > and the impact his contribution is having on making this group welcoming or > pleasant to be involved with. > > To avoid putting words in mouths but still convey the common grievances, > we’ll quote from those who have complained: > > - > > “This individual is toxic to the group and is therefore directly > affecting the ability of the group to perform its aims” > - > > “I believe this individual is the sole biggest cause of loss of > respect and members for the FIG” > - > > “I stepped down as a voting representative due to this member” > - > > “The presence of this individual makes me not want to contribute or > get involved with to the PHP FIG” > - > > “My main problem with him is that every time I opened a threads lately > to read up, he's getting into some tantrum with other over small > meaningless things. Sometimes he might even be right but honestly I don't > even care whether he is right or wrong. They is just plainly disrupting > the > FIG at this stage. He used to be annoying, but I was fine with that, this > is just disruptive though.” > > > The following complainants said they are happy to be named (Nobody asked > not to be named, but some we never asked if they were happy to be named): > > - > > Ross Tuck - Community figure > - > > Larry Garfield - Drupal project representative > - > > Graham Daniels - PHP League project representative > - > > Fabien Potencier - Symfony project representative > - > > Mike van Riel - PHPDoc project representative > - > > Jordi Boggiano - Composer project representative > - > > Anthony Ferrara - Community figure > - > > Phil Sturgeon - Former project representative and community figure > - > > Christopher Pitt - Former project representative and community figure > - > > Rafael Dohms - Community figure > - > > Marc Alexander - phpBB project representative > - > > Cees-Jan Kiewiet - ReactPHP project representative > > > In total the number of complaints about this individual totals about 20 > however there have also been other concerns aired about this individual > publicly and a number of individuals who contacted us said they in turn had > heard complaints about Paul from others; as a result of this, and being > explicitly asked what we can do/to do something about this situation, > including requests of this specific course of action we are starting this > discussion on PMJ’s membership. It is not the role of the secretaries to > handle this kind of thing or pass judgement on member projects so we are > posting this topic to invite discussion from both sides of the table out in > the open. > > We believe having this discussion going on for too long will not be > conducive to the FIG so a vote [to request a new representative from Aura, > which will result in Aura’s expulsion unless a new representative is > provided] will then commence unless a conclusion has been reached agreeable > by all sides before that point. That vote should then put an end to the > current situation. > > To clarify further, this topic does not indicate the opinion of > secretaries that this project representative should be expelled, but that > we have been asked by a significant number of voting members and community > members to do something about it so we are moving those complaints into > public for discussion by voting members as we can do nothing but move the > discussion and complaints to the mailing list for the attention of voting > members. > > I know this is a difficult discussion to avoid making personal, but please > try and keep it civil and respect self-throttling. People have requested we > ensure we always have two week discussion periods before voting on matters > which means that we will not lock this topic unless we have no other option > open to us but will be issuing temporary mailing list bans on anyone not > respecting rules about civility or self throttling; more than 3 responses > in a 24 hour period will result in a 24 hour temporary ban, as will > repeatedly making posts that cross boundaries into flaming. If rules are > broken multiple times, we will increase the time period of bans. > > Many thanks, > > The Secretaries > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/4913c802-2144-4024-a463-f537c1eb1d95%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
