Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
On 10/30/18 02:51pm, Ethan Rakoff wrote: Remember that as technical people working on a project that spans the world, we communicate almost exclusively through text, and it can be easy to misinterpret the tone of someone else. We should all make an effort to remember this in writing and in reading. Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to ignorance or misunderstanding. This went beyond a simple misunderstanding in medium. It's dripping with anger! I understand - and actually prefer - truth and correctness when soliciting help from others. Blunt is fine: It's quick and to-the-point. I am not fond of overly-inclusive communities that effectively censor criticism because it might hurt feelings. However... I spent so long formally submitting my application after the initial mix-up because I wasn't sure I wanted to get reamed in a similar manner - "Does everyone react this way?", I thought. I had urges to speak out but I was afraid that this was just 'how it is'. When things went off the rails I considered withdrawing. Perhaps I won't make TU status but it might be of value to this community to know that this made an applicant think twice about joining. I do appreciate Eli apologizing on the other thread. I can relate to the anger stemming from caring too much - I sometimes have to walk away from my keyboard for the same reason. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
SORRY ABOUT THAT. I meant to send that directly to Giancarlo. On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 8:48 PM Giancarlo Razzolini via aur-general < aur-general@archlinux.org> wrote: > Em outubro 30, 2018 16:07 Ralf Mardorf escreveu: > > Apparently this TU has got special rights. That he could behave like > > this again and again does strengthen him to continue doing it. > > > This thread has lived much longer than it's purpose. Let's stop this right > now. > > I'm placing this list into emergency moderation if this continues. I'm > confident > all the parties understood what happened by now and how to avoid this in > the future. > > Thanks to all, > Giancarlo Razzolini -- Best, polyzen
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
17:16 grazzolini, but we're finally getting somewhere :\ 17:37 grazzolini, the reason it continues is because they're an underlying problem we're trying to solve 17:37 that's long overdue 17:38 there's* 17:38 I'm afraid this is just a temporary band-aid 17:39 eg. I just rejoined #archlinux-offtopic after months of leaving FOR THIS EXACT REASON 17:39 then "sangy | Foxboron: don't try to downplay toxic behavior from dmc" 17:40 I understand wanting to get the thread behind us because of how bad it looks, but .. it is what it is 17:40 dmc: Yo, it was an attempt at a poor joke 17:41 it was a direct jab 17:41 it is not a joke 17:41 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:41 we're literally going on about professionalism 17:41 * Foxboron finds the door 17:41 see? 17:41 do you not think your attitude is toxic? 17:42 why should I continue with you? 17:42 the first think I told you was "I'm disapointed that you're not trying to help me find a solution and just fanned the flames" 17:42 the first thing you said was 'k' 17:42 there you go 17:43 grazzolini, the thread isn't trolling. if people want their voices to be heard, to speak out against bullying.. you shouldn't moderate that 17:45 dmc | sangy, honestly I don't know if you actually care or just are putting on a show 17:45 could you not 17:45 this is still -testing, and that argument is incredibly unproductive 17:46 because you asked nicely 17:47 this is my fault: I worng windowed my original comment 17:47 sorry: this discussion does /not/ belong here 17:48 That was my assumption :p 17:48 of course not On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 8:48 PM Giancarlo Razzolini via aur-general < aur-general@archlinux.org> wrote: > Em outubro 30, 2018 16:07 Ralf Mardorf escreveu: > > Apparently this TU has got special rights. That he could behave like > > this again and again does strengthen him to continue doing it. > > > This thread has lived much longer than it's purpose. Let's stop this right > now. > > I'm placing this list into emergency moderation if this continues. I'm > confident > all the parties understood what happened by now and how to avoid this in > the future. > > Thanks to all, > Giancarlo Razzolini -- Best, polyzen
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
Hi, On 30-10-18, Giancarlo Razzolini via aur-general wrote: > Em outubro 30, 2018 16:07 Ralf Mardorf escreveu: > > Apparently this TU has got special rights. That he could behave like > > this again and again does strengthen him to continue doing it. > > > This thread has lived much longer than it's purpose. Let's stop this right > now. > > I'm placing this list into emergency moderation if this continues. I'm > confident > all the parties understood what happened by now and how to avoid this in the > future. It was not my intention to start a debate on whether we should call what happened "bullying" or "violent". Let's call that "problematic behaviour" if that is easier. Given that several people (including TUs) expressed that it was inappropriate, the problem is real -- and recurring. My intention was to expose the problem and start discussing ways to ensure that it will not happen again. If the matter is to be "handled internally" and it is handled successfully, then both goals are fulfilled and the subject is closed for me. Anyway, I'm off for vacations so I won't monitor the list until next week. Baptiste signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
Em outubro 30, 2018 16:07 Ralf Mardorf escreveu: Apparently this TU has got special rights. That he could behave like this again and again does strengthen him to continue doing it. This thread has lived much longer than it's purpose. Let's stop this right now. I'm placing this list into emergency moderation if this continues. I'm confident all the parties understood what happened by now and how to avoid this in the future. Thanks to all, Giancarlo Razzolini pgpQQwIn3OFxE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
Hi, I read all related mails, but neither replied to the mailing list, nor off-list until now. Now I'll add a single comment. The TU writing this reply https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-October/034408.html is malignant manipulative. Instead of assuming good faith, he opens with smear, "s/respectfully/passive-aggressively/". Perhaps the one who wrote the application is mistaken regarding some things. If so, it's no reason to make mountains out of molehills, but this TU does. Claims such as "Most of those people" followed by a sniffy comment is agitation. This TU shouts. Shouting is against all mailing list netiquettes. It ends with a melodramatic closing... "I read this differently, you care so much that you don't trust anyone else to do it right. You're a control freak, and I don't want to have to deal with you on the team, no matter how capable you are as a programmer." ...containing "generosity": "Other TUs can make their own decisions of course." This is a pattern, it isn't the first time he behaves in this way. Regarding the disputes we had during the migration to systemd, the mailing lists were moderated for less than the trolling we experienced during the application thread by this TU. Apparently this TU has got special rights. That he could behave like this again and again does strengthen him to continue doing it. Regards, Ralf
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
I think that is the most fair assessment of the situation that I have read today. On Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 1:48 PM Connor Behan via aur-general < aur-general@archlinux.org> wrote: > On 2018-10-30 01:23 PM, Adam Levy via aur-general wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 1:06 PM Daniel Capella > > wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 5:02 PM Adam Levy > >> wrote: > >>> Being curt and direct is against the code of conduct? > >>> > >>> It seems to me that these three rules in particular are relevant in > this > >>> case and were not respected: "Respect other users", "Do not flame" and > "Be responsible". > >> > >> -- > >> Best, > >> polyzen > >> > > The only rule there that strikes me as potentially having been violated > is > > "respect other users". But I think that cuts both ways in this case to be > > perfectly honest. It could be argued that Konstantin did not respect the > > existing TUs initial responses to his questions. But that's debatable. > > > > The main point that I am interested in making is that this initial claim > of > > bullying and violent communication was overblown and inaccurate. > > Hot-button words like "bullying" and "violence" are being used as a > rhetorical crutch. > > However, I think the initial accusation of "whining" and telling > "bald-faced lies" was also inappropriate. An average AUR packager might > not realize that TUs routinely take over packages made by others and > move them to [community]. Claiming that a package "is broken" instead of > "causes orphan dependencies" also sounds like an honest mistake. And I > can't blame a user for not knowing enough about the bug wrangler's > workflow to tell which mailing list actions will make a difference. > > In theory, this can be resolved with an RTFM. But when this realization > means that one will have to completely change his approach to developing > and packaging software for a larger community, some frustration is > understandable. > >
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
On 2018-10-30 01:23 PM, Adam Levy via aur-general wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 1:06 PM Daniel Capella > wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 5:02 PM Adam Levy >> wrote: >>> Being curt and direct is against the code of conduct? >>> >>> It seems to me that these three rules in particular are relevant in this >>> case and were not respected: "Respect other users", "Do not flame" and "Be >>> responsible". >> >> -- >> Best, >> polyzen >> > The only rule there that strikes me as potentially having been violated is > "respect other users". But I think that cuts both ways in this case to be > perfectly honest. It could be argued that Konstantin did not respect the > existing TUs initial responses to his questions. But that's debatable. > > The main point that I am interested in making is that this initial claim of > bullying and violent communication was overblown and inaccurate. Hot-button words like "bullying" and "violence" are being used as a rhetorical crutch. However, I think the initial accusation of "whining" and telling "bald-faced lies" was also inappropriate. An average AUR packager might not realize that TUs routinely take over packages made by others and move them to [community]. Claiming that a package "is broken" instead of "causes orphan dependencies" also sounds like an honest mistake. And I can't blame a user for not knowing enough about the bug wrangler's workflow to tell which mailing list actions will make a difference. In theory, this can be resolved with an RTFM. But when this realization means that one will have to completely change his approach to developing and packaging software for a larger community, some frustration is understandable. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
The only rule there that strikes me as potentially having been violated is "respect other users". But I think that cuts both ways in this case to be perfectly honest. It could be argued that Konstantin did not respect the existing TUs initial responses to his questions. But that's debatable. The main point that I am interested in making is that this initial claim of bullying and violent communication was overblown and inaccurate. On Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 1:06 PM Daniel Capella wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 5:02 PM Adam Levy > wrote: > >> Being curt and direct is against the code of conduct? >> > > > It seems to me that these three rules in particular are relevant in this > > case and were not respected: "Respect other users", "Do not flame" and > "Be > > responsible". > > > > Baptiste > > -- > Best, > polyzen >
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 5:02 PM Adam Levy wrote: > Being curt and direct is against the code of conduct? > > It seems to me that these three rules in particular are relevant in this > case and were not respected: "Respect other users", "Do not flame" and "Be > responsible". > > Baptiste -- Best, polyzen
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
Being curt and direct is against the code of conduct? On Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 12:54 PM Daniel Capella wrote: > hate crimes and physical violence* > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 4:53 PM Daniel Capella > wrote: > >> > *b. *to distort or twist the sense or intention of: the reporters did >> violence to my speech. >> >> Violent speech, at least of late, is more defined as inciting hate crimes >> and actual violence. Perhaps we should use "cruel" here. >> >> > In fact if you are repeatedly trying to complain about something that >> has already been addressed, or cannot be changed, or is outside of the >> scope of a conversation, then yeah I would agree that is whining. >> >> > repeatedly trying to argue with him >> >> repeatedly trying to defend himself and resolve the situation* >> >> > Frankly reputation and standing do matter here. I have seen Eli be very >> curt with people in the past and I am not surprised that people have taken >> offense. But I haven't ever seen Eli do this without some justification, >> >> > , then I am personally OK with that >> >> As a professional environment, this is definitively not okay. Also see >> our CoC. >> >> > bully -* 1. * A person who is habitually cruel or overbearing, >> especially to smaller or weaker people. >> >> -- >> Best, >> polyzen >> > > > -- > Best, > polyzen >
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
hate crimes and physical violence* On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 4:53 PM Daniel Capella wrote: > > *b. *to distort or twist the sense or intention of: the reporters did > violence to my speech. > > Violent speech, at least of late, is more defined as inciting hate crimes > and actual violence. Perhaps we should use "cruel" here. > > > In fact if you are repeatedly trying to complain about something that > has already been addressed, or cannot be changed, or is outside of the > scope of a conversation, then yeah I would agree that is whining. > > > repeatedly trying to argue with him > > repeatedly trying to defend himself and resolve the situation* > > > Frankly reputation and standing do matter here. I have seen Eli be very > curt with people in the past and I am not surprised that people have taken > offense. But I haven't ever seen Eli do this without some justification, > > > , then I am personally OK with that > > As a professional environment, this is definitively not okay. Also see our > CoC. > > > bully -* 1. * A person who is habitually cruel or overbearing, > especially to smaller or weaker people. > > -- > Best, > polyzen > -- Best, polyzen
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
> *b. *to distort or twist the sense or intention of: the reporters did violence to my speech. Violent speech, at least of late, is more defined as inciting hate crimes and actual violence. Perhaps we should use "cruel" here. > In fact if you are repeatedly trying to complain about something that has already been addressed, or cannot be changed, or is outside of the scope of a conversation, then yeah I would agree that is whining. > repeatedly trying to argue with him repeatedly trying to defend himself and resolve the situation* > Frankly reputation and standing do matter here. I have seen Eli be very curt with people in the past and I am not surprised that people have taken offense. But I haven't ever seen Eli do this without some justification, > , then I am personally OK with that As a professional environment, this is definitively not okay. Also see our CoC. > bully -* 1. * A person who is habitually cruel or overbearing, especially to smaller or weaker people. -- Best, polyzen
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
Apologies for my mis-formatted email. You may need to expand the quoted text to read it. I think I goofed it. On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 7:52 AM Adam Levy wrote: > > > Even if you are 100% correct, there were a lot of other messages, not > > just the linked ones. > > First I want to mention that I did in fact read all of the emails, but > presumably someone trying to make a point about bullying in those > emails would have linked to the most contentious ones. So those are > the ones I reviewed prior to writing my first email. > > As I recall when I was initially reading that chain, I tended to agree > with the points that Eli was making. I trust his assessment of what > transpired with your bug reports and I agree with his assessment of > your complaints regarding how your AUR packages were handled. Frankly > reputation and standing do matter here. I have seen Eli be very curt > with people in the past and I am not surprised that people have taken > offense. But I haven't ever seen Eli do this without some > justification, normally that the person in question is ignorant of > policies and procedures in a context where they have a responsibility > to be informed. I have also seen Eli admit mistakes when he was wrong. > So when I read what he wrote about how you were reopening bug requests > that had been repeatedly closed I tended to believe him over you. It > is totally reasonable to make a character judgement based on > reputation and social standing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems > that you are saying that Eli was lying or deceitful or > mis-characterizing the situation. > > I don't generally agree with Eli's tact but I don't agree that it > crossed a line into bullying. I feel that now you are > mis-characterizing what transpired. But there is some grey area here > and room for interpretation so I'll grant you that. I certainly don't > think calling you a liar is a fair assessment, nor is that at all > productive in nearly any context. > > My point about being bullied in the past is that I have a hard time > seeing how anything that was said constitutes bullying. But as I > pointed out, we don't have a well-defined definition of bullying, or > ganging up, or violent emailing. So could we be more specific? Saying > that you are whining is not bullying. In fact if you are repeatedly > trying to complain about something that has already been addressed, or > cannot be changed, or is outside of the scope of a conversation, then > yeah I would agree that is whining. But again, whining is not a > technical term, so I agree Eli took some liberty with that tact. Again > I don't agree with that approach. But again, that's not bullying in my > view. > > I'm sorry that this ordeal has caused you distress, to say the least. > However, this community doesn't exist to cater to people's feelings. > We should be considerate of feelings insofar as it helps us all get > along and be more productive, but there will always be times when the > people in charge here will want to do things in a way that some users > disagree with. Sometimes that gets communicated in a way that rubs > people the wrong way and causes some hurt feelings. That's not ideal > but it's not uncommon that after a user hears an explanation they > don't agree with that they start to argue endlessly. I'd rather Eli's > time, and all of the other TU's time, be spent on doing what they are > best at: maintaining Arch. If that means that they spend a little less > time being exceptionally thoughtful about other people's feelings who > are repeatedly trying to argue with him, then I am personally OK with > that. > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 6:54 AM Santiago Torres-Arias via aur-general > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 01:27:09PM +0100, Baptiste Jonglez wrote: > > > Hi Santiago, > > > > > > Now that the discussion period is over, I am taking time to fully answer > > > this, since it's much more general and important than the TU application > > > itself. > > > > Hi Baptiste. > > > > I read your email, and I do agree with your picture in general. I don't > > intend to "sweep anything under the rug" but rather keep two things > > separate: > > > > 1. A TU application > > 2. A discussion about the way some members of our community approach > >their peers.* > > > > I personally want to keep both conversations separate, mostly because I > > think the latter could be better handled internally. > > > > Thanks, > > -Santiago. > > > > * I don't say names here because I'm sure this is not the > > only instance of this happening.
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
> Even if you are 100% correct, there were a lot of other messages, not > just the linked ones. First I want to mention that I did in fact read all of the emails, but presumably someone trying to make a point about bullying in those emails would have linked to the most contentious ones. So those are the ones I reviewed prior to writing my first email. As I recall when I was initially reading that chain, I tended to agree with the points that Eli was making. I trust his assessment of what transpired with your bug reports and I agree with his assessment of your complaints regarding how your AUR packages were handled. Frankly reputation and standing do matter here. I have seen Eli be very curt with people in the past and I am not surprised that people have taken offense. But I haven't ever seen Eli do this without some justification, normally that the person in question is ignorant of policies and procedures in a context where they have a responsibility to be informed. I have also seen Eli admit mistakes when he was wrong. So when I read what he wrote about how you were reopening bug requests that had been repeatedly closed I tended to believe him over you. It is totally reasonable to make a character judgement based on reputation and social standing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that you are saying that Eli was lying or deceitful or mis-characterizing the situation. I don't generally agree with Eli's tact but I don't agree that it crossed a line into bullying. I feel that now you are mis-characterizing what transpired. But there is some grey area here and room for interpretation so I'll grant you that. I certainly don't think calling you a liar is a fair assessment, nor is that at all productive in nearly any context. My point about being bullied in the past is that I have a hard time seeing how anything that was said constitutes bullying. But as I pointed out, we don't have a well-defined definition of bullying, or ganging up, or violent emailing. So could we be more specific? Saying that you are whining is not bullying. In fact if you are repeatedly trying to complain about something that has already been addressed, or cannot be changed, or is outside of the scope of a conversation, then yeah I would agree that is whining. But again, whining is not a technical term, so I agree Eli took some liberty with that tact. Again I don't agree with that approach. But again, that's not bullying in my view. I'm sorry that this ordeal has caused you distress, to say the least. However, this community doesn't exist to cater to people's feelings. We should be considerate of feelings insofar as it helps us all get along and be more productive, but there will always be times when the people in charge here will want to do things in a way that some users disagree with. Sometimes that gets communicated in a way that rubs people the wrong way and causes some hurt feelings. That's not ideal but it's not uncommon that after a user hears an explanation they don't agree with that they start to argue endlessly. I'd rather Eli's time, and all of the other TU's time, be spent on doing what they are best at: maintaining Arch. If that means that they spend a little less time being exceptionally thoughtful about other people's feelings who are repeatedly trying to argue with him, then I am personally OK with that. On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 6:54 AM Santiago Torres-Arias via aur-general wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 01:27:09PM +0100, Baptiste Jonglez wrote: > > Hi Santiago, > > > > Now that the discussion period is over, I am taking time to fully answer > > this, since it's much more general and important than the TU application > > itself. > > Hi Baptiste. > > I read your email, and I do agree with your picture in general. I don't > intend to "sweep anything under the rug" but rather keep two things > separate: > > 1. A TU application > 2. A discussion about the way some members of our community approach >their peers.* > > I personally want to keep both conversations separate, mostly because I > think the latter could be better handled internally. > > Thanks, > -Santiago. > > * I don't say names here because I'm sure this is not the > only instance of this happening.
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 01:27:09PM +0100, Baptiste Jonglez wrote: > Hi Santiago, > > Now that the discussion period is over, I am taking time to fully answer > this, since it's much more general and important than the TU application > itself. Hi Baptiste. I read your email, and I do agree with your picture in general. I don't intend to "sweep anything under the rug" but rather keep two things separate: 1. A TU application 2. A discussion about the way some members of our community approach their peers.* I personally want to keep both conversations separate, mostly because I think the latter could be better handled internally. Thanks, -Santiago. * I don't say names here because I'm sure this is not the only instance of this happening. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
Just thought I would cap this whole shebang off with this: Remember that as technical people working on a project that spans the world, we communicate almost exclusively through text, and it can be easy to misinterpret the tone of someone else. We should all make an effort to remember this in writing and in reading. Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to ignorance or misunderstanding. It doesn't matter who was right or wrong, it's always good to behave diplomatically. Ethan Rakoff ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Tuesday, October 30, 2018 2:43 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote: > I will make this as brief as I can, even though I feel there is a lot to > talk about. > > On 30/10/2018 13:06, Adam Levy via aur-general wrote: > > > As an outsider sitting on the sidelines, with absolutely no dog in this > > fight, I have to say that I don't believe that the messages you linked are > > examples of bullying or personal attacks. > > Even if you are 100% correct, there were a lot of other messages, not > just the linked ones. I think you should try and make a broader argument > based on broader observations, but I do understand that you can still > end up with the same conclusion. It's just not fair to judge the whole > situation like this, I believe. > > > The closest I saw to a personal > > attack might be Eli saying that Konstantin is a control freak. I believe > > that could have been said more diplomatically and professionally but it > > strikes me as a legitimate consideration in the context of whether to admit > > a new TU that all other TUs would theoretically have to work along side. > > So me being a blatant liar, having some sort of dark agenda, being a > whiny baby and passive aggressive are not personal insults, etc.? > Whenever, I tried to make a point I was assumed to have nefarious > motives and was insulted and my character attacked. > > > The emails included strong language. Nothing was sugar coated, and efforts > > to be polite had ceased at that point in the exchange. > > From the first email answer to me there were no efforts to be polite > (from the people in question). I actually tried to respond to bring the > discussion about the questions I asked rather than what the discussion > suddenly turned to. > > > We probably have > > different definitions of bullying, but from my perspective those emails > > should not qualify as bullying. Additionally two or more people agreeing > > with each other and backing each other up doesn't constitute ganging up, > > let alone violently. I'm not sure those are well defined concepts in this > > context anyway. What is the difference between supporting each other's > > positions and "ganging up"? How does one have a "violent" email exchange? > > Those descriptions are metaphorical, to say the least, and I would go so > > far as to say that they are hyperbole. > > While I would normally agree that just because two people being in > agreement is not ganging up, in this case, persisting with increasing > intensity to attack me, call me names and imply horrible things about > what I stand for cannot possibly be about anything else. > > > Trusted Users are in a position of power. I do believe that they should > > strive to behave diplomatically and patiently. I think it is more fair and > > accurate to say that Eli and Doug were less diplomatic and patient than > > would appear professional to most outside observers. I don't think that > > makes them bullies or violent, to borrow your language. If those > > accusations are to be substantiated we need to agree on what they mean > > first. > > To this moment I have kept quiet about this, but I think I cannot do > this anymore. I have been emailed privately by people who have > experienced the same sort of things from the same people. They emailed > me just to comfort me, because I think they understand how it feels and > what it does to you. Thank you, to those ones, for lending a shoulder. > They did not say anything publicly on the list for fear of the same > persecution and lash back. I call for them to say something now as I > cannot in clear conscience call them out and put them into this myself. > > > I don't understand what you mean by bullying. > > I think what he means is the weeks on end attacks at my character and > not actually discussing my initial email - which was about what the > available, correct and appropriate ways are to pass on what I know about > a package I depend on in my daily life. Please read my initial email and > tell me if you would have responded the same way they did and then say > what would be the correct way to respond to anyone, not just me, in that > situation. > > > I was bullied as a kid. We're all nerds here. > > I am sorry to hear that happened to you. It really should not happen to > anyone. But what exactly is your point? Are you claiming that because > you were bullied then you can decide for eve
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
I will make this as brief as I can, even though I feel there is a lot to talk about. On 30/10/2018 13:06, Adam Levy via aur-general wrote: > As an outsider sitting on the sidelines, with absolutely no dog in this > fight, I have to say that I don't believe that the messages you linked are > examples of bullying or personal attacks. Even if you are 100% correct, there were a lot of other messages, not just the linked ones. I think you should try and make a broader argument based on broader observations, but I do understand that you can still end up with the same conclusion. It's just not fair to judge the whole situation like this, I believe. > The closest I saw to a personal > attack might be Eli saying that Konstantin is a control freak. I believe > that could have been said more diplomatically and professionally but it > strikes me as a legitimate consideration in the context of whether to admit > a new TU that all other TUs would theoretically have to work along side. So me being a blatant liar, having some sort of dark agenda, being a whiny baby and passive aggressive are not personal insults, etc.? Whenever, I tried to make a point I was assumed to have nefarious motives and was insulted and my character attacked. > The emails included strong language. Nothing was sugar coated, and efforts > to be polite had ceased at that point in the exchange. From the first email answer to me there were no efforts to be polite (from the people in question). I actually tried to respond to bring the discussion about the questions I asked rather than what the discussion suddenly turned to. > We probably have > different definitions of bullying, but from my perspective those emails > should not qualify as bullying. Additionally two or more people agreeing > with each other and backing each other up doesn't constitute ganging up, > let alone violently. I'm not sure those are well defined concepts in this > context anyway. What is the difference between supporting each other's > positions and "ganging up"? How does one have a "violent" email exchange? > Those descriptions are metaphorical, to say the least, and I would go so > far as to say that they are hyperbole. While I would normally agree that just because two people being in agreement is not ganging up, in this case, persisting with increasing intensity to attack me, call me names and imply horrible things about what I stand for cannot possibly be about anything else. > Trusted Users are in a position of power. I do believe that they should > strive to behave diplomatically and patiently. I think it is more fair and > accurate to say that Eli and Doug were less diplomatic and patient than > would appear professional to most outside observers. I don't think that > makes them bullies or violent, to borrow your language. If those > accusations are to be substantiated we need to agree on what they mean > first. To this moment I have kept quiet about this, but I think I cannot do this anymore. I have been emailed privately by people who have experienced the same sort of things from the same people. They emailed me just to comfort me, because I think they understand how it feels and what it does to you. Thank you, to those ones, for lending a shoulder. They did not say anything publicly on the list for fear of the same persecution and lash back. I call for them to say something now as I cannot in clear conscience call them out and put them into this myself. > I don't understand what you mean by bullying. I think what he means is the weeks on end attacks at my character and not actually discussing my initial email - which was about what the available, correct and appropriate ways are to pass on what I know about a package I depend on in my daily life. Please read my initial email and tell me if you would have responded the same way they did and then say what would be the correct way to respond to anyone, not just me, in that situation. > I was bullied as a kid. We're all nerds here. I am sorry to hear that happened to you. It really should not happen to anyone. But what exactly is your point? Are you claiming that because you were bullied then you can decide for everyone else universally if they are being bullied? Or nerds can't be bullies? I don't mean to offend or attack you. I just don't understand your point. If you are trying to sympathise/empathise, I personally do not think you have understood how I feel. Possibly clarify. > Chances are we all had a > bully as a kid. If my bully had been as articulate as what was displayed in > these emails then I'm not sure he would have even been effective as a > bully. Smart and articulate people make the best bullies. They can really get you where it hurts and lasts. I think that's been proven many times. > Chances are we probably would have gotten along better because he > would have been talking to me directly using mostly logical arguments. But > no, my bully called me names and made fun of me. That's exactly what happene
Re: [aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
As an outsider sitting on the sidelines, with absolutely no dog in this fight, I have to say that I don't believe that the messages you linked are examples of bullying or personal attacks. The closest I saw to a personal attack might be Eli saying that Konstantin is a control freak. I believe that could have been said more diplomatically and professionally but it strikes me as a legitimate consideration in the context of whether to admit a new TU that all other TUs would theoretically have to work along side. The emails included strong language. Nothing was sugar coated, and efforts to be polite had ceased at that point in the exchange. We probably have different definitions of bullying, but from my perspective those emails should not qualify as bullying. Additionally two or more people agreeing with each other and backing each other up doesn't constitute ganging up, let alone violently. I'm not sure those are well defined concepts in this context anyway. What is the difference between supporting each other's positions and "ganging up"? How does one have a "violent" email exchange? Those descriptions are metaphorical, to say the least, and I would go so far as to say that they are hyperbole. Trusted Users are in a position of power. I do believe that they should strive to behave diplomatically and patiently. I think it is more fair and accurate to say that Eli and Doug were less diplomatic and patient than would appear professional to most outside observers. I don't think that makes them bullies or violent, to borrow your language. If those accusations are to be substantiated we need to agree on what they mean first. I don't understand what you mean by bullying. I was bullied as a kid. We're all nerds here. Chances are we all had a bully as a kid. If my bully had been as articulate as what was displayed in these emails then I'm not sure he would have even been effective as a bully. Chances are we probably would have gotten along better because he would have been talking to me directly using mostly logical arguments. But no, my bully called me names and made fun of me. At one point he was physically violent. That's not to say that I don't think bullying can't happen over digital communication, I just can't reconcile my understanding of bullying with what is being described here as such. On Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 8:27 AM Baptiste Jonglez wrote: > Hi Santiago, > > Now that the discussion period is over, I am taking time to fully answer > this, since it's much more general and important than the TU application > itself. > > On 28-10-18, Santiago Torres-Arias wrote: > > I've been following this email thread quite closely and without > > participating as I was hoping to keep opinions to myself --- I don't > > think I have much questions other than what's already asked for > > Konstantin --- and make up my mind for voting. > > > > It's clear that it is time to take a step back and stop fanning the > > flames. We are all passionate people, and sometimes this passion leads > > us to the type of arguments we are having right now. I agree with Eli, > > this is not a toy operating system and there are things at stake. > > However, I'm completely convinced that no ill intention is coming from > > everyone involved, and that, if we consider this optic, it's clear that > > this is just a non-technical quarrel that should've been shelved a while > > ago. > > > > Personally, I think this is a good opportunity to tone it down for a > > second, leave the 10+ emails behind us and try to go back to the things > > that make this community friendly and welcoming. > > > > Baptiste, Konstantin, Eli, and Doug. Please take a deep breath and > > extend a friendly handshake. I'm sure everyone else following this > > exchnage thinks this is the reasonable way to move forward. > > I understand that you want to calm things down and the intention is good, > but you make it appear as if the animosity is symmetrical. But the > situation is actually not: we have two bullies ganging up violently on a > newcomer, who has so far kept a very cool head and stayed polite where > most people would have gotten angry. On my side I reacted more angrily > because I am getting fed up with this kind of repeated toxic attitude, and > other people expressed dismay at the violent personal attacks we > witnessed. > > Note that here I am not making any judgement on the validity of the > arguments in the various technical debates: this is important but it is > not the point here. The point is precisely to be able to have interesting > discussions and debates, without resorting to personal attacks, insults or > abusing a dominating position, as both Doug and Eli have repeatedly done > in the past and now again: > > > https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-September/034287.html > > https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-October/034402.html > > https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-October/034408.html > > htt
[aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
Hi Santiago, Now that the discussion period is over, I am taking time to fully answer this, since it's much more general and important than the TU application itself. On 28-10-18, Santiago Torres-Arias wrote: > I've been following this email thread quite closely and without > participating as I was hoping to keep opinions to myself --- I don't > think I have much questions other than what's already asked for > Konstantin --- and make up my mind for voting. > > It's clear that it is time to take a step back and stop fanning the > flames. We are all passionate people, and sometimes this passion leads > us to the type of arguments we are having right now. I agree with Eli, > this is not a toy operating system and there are things at stake. > However, I'm completely convinced that no ill intention is coming from > everyone involved, and that, if we consider this optic, it's clear that > this is just a non-technical quarrel that should've been shelved a while > ago. > > Personally, I think this is a good opportunity to tone it down for a > second, leave the 10+ emails behind us and try to go back to the things > that make this community friendly and welcoming. > > Baptiste, Konstantin, Eli, and Doug. Please take a deep breath and > extend a friendly handshake. I'm sure everyone else following this > exchnage thinks this is the reasonable way to move forward. I understand that you want to calm things down and the intention is good, but you make it appear as if the animosity is symmetrical. But the situation is actually not: we have two bullies ganging up violently on a newcomer, who has so far kept a very cool head and stayed polite where most people would have gotten angry. On my side I reacted more angrily because I am getting fed up with this kind of repeated toxic attitude, and other people expressed dismay at the violent personal attacks we witnessed. Note that here I am not making any judgement on the validity of the arguments in the various technical debates: this is important but it is not the point here. The point is precisely to be able to have interesting discussions and debates, without resorting to personal attacks, insults or abusing a dominating position, as both Doug and Eli have repeatedly done in the past and now again: https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-September/034287.html https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-October/034402.html https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-October/034408.html https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-October/034411.html This is not a witch-hunt: Doug and Eli, this discussion does *not* question your attachment to this community, the quality of your work or the quality of your technical opinions in general. In fact your are both much more knowledgeable and active in Arch than most people including me. But that is certainly not a valid reason to start bullying people around, or else I am grossly mistaken about this whole community. As a general rule, when nobody stands up publicly against a bully, the bully will just continue bullying people the same way in the future, perhaps even more confidently. Of course, we can also bury our head in the sand and pride ourselves that our community is "friendly and welcoming" (I think this is still true on the whole btw) while leaving the bullies act unchecked. Santiago, I don't mean this as a personal attack on you, I just think that it's a bad idea to sweep such unacceptable personal behaviour under the carpet as if nothing happened. Quite frankly, in the future I am considering taking whatever actions are necessary to make sure that this kind of hurtful behaviour doesn't happen again, including asking for the bully's resignation or resigning myself. I hope that we will find ways to work things out without having to resort to such extremes. Discussing these problems seems like a good start :) Baptiste signature.asc Description: PGP signature
