In closing on my part I do not feel the actions/words of PMJ are grounds for expulsion, but I do feel discussions like the one I'm replying to below should have been happening all along...and hopefully will continue to happen in the future. We all carry our passions in discussions held here but extra "color" such as the incidences highlighted in this thread, which are not isolated to Paul, are not needed in a professional environment.
I urge that we not carry this to a vote, which would likely fail and only seek to further damage the public FIG image, but instead close the issue and continue communication/coaching in a more constructive way, such as Pedro (I assume that is his name since the email address, and not a signature, carries that name) shared in this thoughtful reply to Paul's request. Regards, Adam Culp On Friday, July 22, 2016 at 4:22:57 PM UTC-4, pedrofr...@gmail.com wrote: > > Hey, Michael. I don't intend to further this discussion, but I'd like to > reply to Paul's last post. > > >> Indeed, since not everyone here agrees that my speech was > objectionable, perhaps you can say specifically (in reference to the many > points you raised) what you would have *liked* me to have said instead of > what I *actually* said. That would probably be the best indicator of your > desires. > > > >None of the complainants has yet volunteered how they would modify my > messages (as linked in Larry Garfield's points-of-complaint) to make my > words conform to their sensibilities regarding "tone." > > Paul, in the few examples I presented in this thread, I don't think any > suggestion is necessary, at all. But to prevent you from repeating this as > a valid argument, I'll forward my suggestions. > > 1. > > You know, you're right -- maybe I should try being the driving force > behind roughly half the PSRs produced by this group instead. > > > > (/me shrugs) > <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/php-fig/RwFMv1NokBQ/7XPPLEDJDwAJ>: > > You could've said nothing at all, or you could've said something along the > lines of "I don't agree I'm not a constructive member". "/me shrugs" was > just plain childish. > > 2. > > I have been remarkably restrained in my commentary. However, if you want > to keep poking at it, I can become less restrained. Your call. > <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/php-fig/RwFMv1NokBQ/Mkna9CLJDwAJ> > > You could've very well stopped at "I've been restrained in my commentary". > No need to threaten people with unprofessionalism. > > 3. > > /me shrugs > <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/php-fig/RwFMv1NokBQ/sfe47DfJDwAJ> > > This was just unnecessary. No need to send an entire email with a > sarcastic remark. > > 4. > > I agree. Be sure to tell that to Phil Sturgeon, who has been insulting > to me on this list, on Twitter (where he tweets bravely about me from > behind a block), on Reddit, on his website, on his podcast, and goodness > knows where else. > <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/php-fig/RwFMv1NokBQ/XKGfyjDDDwAJ> > > There was just no need to discuss your fight with Phil in this thread. > > 5. > > It is that if you're going to call "people" out for bad behavior, be > sure to call out Phil, who is far more deserving of it. > <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/php-fig/RwFMv1NokBQ/MWpxepLIDwAJ> > > There was just no need to keep on discussing your fight with Phil in this > thread. > > 6. > > And thank goodness for that. > <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/php-fig/RwFMv1NokBQ/tdXoFNvIDwAJ> > > Third email within the same thread discussing "it's phil's fault". > > 7. > >... in his usual fashion. You know how I like consistency, Phil; thank > you for always being a drama queen. > > > >Besides, I thought you left? (/me shrugs) > <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/php-fig/cjLBp2weYaA/up8nw9fXDQAJ> > > Calling Phil a "drama queen". I don't have any advice here, if you think > this was really necessary within a FIG thread, I don't think we'll agree on > much. Also, what exactly is "/me shrugs" going to contribute to the > discussion? > > There you go. That's MY advice. > > Em sexta-feira, 22 de julho de 2016 16:11:25 UTC-3, Michael Cullum > escreveu: >> >> Okay, thanks Paul for your response. I will put this to a vote on >> Tuesday; currently I am at a conference in Barcelona and Samantha is on >> php[cruise] so our availability and access is limited. If anyone wishes to >> make any closing remarks, you are welcome to do so before then, but I'd ask >> that responses are limited to closing remarks, not further discussion. >> >> Thanks, >> Michael >> >> On 22 Jul 2016 8:15 p.m., "'Brian Teeman' via PHP Framework >> Interoperability Group" <php...@googlegroups.com> wrote: >> >>> It seems quite clear that pmj wants to force this to a vote. >>> >>> -- >>> 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+u...@googlegroups.com. >>> To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/55b1fb22-feb7-49dd-a66c-ba9f0da4aea1%40googlegroups.com >>> >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/55b1fb22-feb7-49dd-a66c-ba9f0da4aea1%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> -- 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/0729f715-a673-4983-9279-2445d60edca9%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
