Hi, as I already mentioned in a message on a previous thread, I'm -1 on banning him. Last time this issue came up I contacted him and we discussed about these problems several times. For a while things got better and hhis behavior got a bit better and his posts less frequent, but lately he got "active" again.
If you try to get in his shoes, you can see how his behavior kind of makes sense -- even thought results are far from ideal: 1) he wants to improve Python and fix problems that affect or might affect him -- this is completely understandable and reasonable; 2) however, he read the CLA and disagrees with/doesn't understand a few things -- this also is somewhat reasonable and shared by a few other persons; the fact that most of the others don't care / trust it and just sign it without even reading doesn't mean that he's wrong; 3) without a signed CLA he is unable to contribute code (even if he's otherwise willing and able to do so), and this places him in a very frustrating position where he his not able to fix things himself and has to rely on others; 4) in an attempt to catch the attention of others he relies on passive-aggressiveness -- likely because he thinks this is the most effective tool he has available; His behavior does catch our attention (giving the impression of (short-term) effectiveness), but in a negative way. There's also a vicious circle where our behavior towards him increases his frustration and leads him to complain louder in an attempt to compensate; the fact that we already start with a negative bias against him doesn't help either. I also agree with Ned when he says: On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Ned Deily <n...@acm.org> wrote: > > [...] I personally don't see his behavior, in and of itself, as all that > harmful. I *do* see the negative reaction it provokes as being harmful. [...] > That said, I think a ban will make him even more frustrated, and that might lead to two outcomes: 1) he will eventually gave up (and make some people happy); 2) he will likely still face problems with Python that he wants to fix and he will have to find other ways to report them, since the regular ways have been precluded to him, thus perpetuating the aforementioned vicious circle. I personally don't have problems talking with him, and, if we decided not to ban him, I'm available to spend more time talking with him and being a mediator. I'm not very active on the mailing lists, but I don't mind taking actions on the bug tracker (so feel free to add me to the issues he reports -- especially if he causes problems). I also agree that if people don't want to discuss with him on the MLs they should just ignore his messages, and especially they should avoid replying with "attacks" against him or his behavior, rather than "attacks" against his proposals. I've already seen a few of his threads that got ignored for a few weeks before he pinged the thread only to be ignored again, so this method seems somewhat effective. (And FTR I don't think I'm wasting my time -- if anything I'm sharpening my already nearly-limitless patience ;). Best Regards, Ezio Melotti _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
