Re: Question to all Candidates: Heated discussions
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:11:39PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > Wouter Verhelst writes: > > > On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 02:40:32AM +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: > > > Do you think current frequency/amount of heated discussions is > > > acceptable for the Debian project? > > > > I believe no amount of ad-hominem discussion is acceptable. > > There's a significant difference between ad hominem discussion (which I > interpret as meaning “discussion about a person”) versus argumentum ad > hominem (the widely-used but sometimes poorly-understood logical > fallacy http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html>). I meant 'ad hominem attacks', rather than 'ad hominem discussion'. I.e., you're making the discussion personal, rather than about the technical matter you're supposedly talking about. -- The biometric identification system at the gates of the CIA headquarters works because there's a guard with a large gun making sure no one is trying to fool the system. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/biometrics.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Question to all Candidates: Heated discussions
Wouter Verhelst writes: > On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 02:40:32AM +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: > > Do you think current frequency/amount of heated discussions is > > acceptable for the Debian project? > > I believe no amount of ad-hominem discussion is acceptable. There's a significant difference between ad hominem discussion (which I interpret as meaning “discussion about a person”) versus argumentum ad hominem (the widely-used but sometimes poorly-understood logical fallacy http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html>). The only case where ad hominem discussion qualifies as the argumentum ad hominem fallacy is when it is used as a red herring; i.e. when the personal details being discussed are irrelevant to the substance of the argument. Could you clarify what you mean by your statement above in light of that difference? -- \ “I used to be an airline pilot. I got fired because I kept | `\ locking the keys in the plane. They caught me on an 80 foot | _o__)stepladder with a coathanger.” —Steven Wright | Ben Finney pgpKfEMjGDJsT.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Question to all Candidates: Heated discussions
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 02:40:32AM +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: > Hello =) > > Sometimes technical Debian discussions (mailing lists, bug reports, > blog posts, etc.) become personal flame-wars. Indeed. > Do you think current frequency/amount of heated discussions is > acceptable for the Debian project? I believe no amount of ad-hominem discussion is acceptable. I do believe heated arguments are acceptable, but it should not go personal; i.e., the difference between "this is a silly argument, because " and "don't be silly". > What would you do to reduce those? I go into that in quite some detail in my platform. To summarize: I encourage people to (politely) challenge people on what should be unacceptable behaviour but (in our community) isn't, yet, and will do so myself. -- The biometric identification system at the gates of the CIA headquarters works because there's a guard with a large gun making sure no one is trying to fool the system. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/biometrics.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Question to all Candidates: Heated discussions
Le Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 02:40:32AM +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs a écrit : > Hello =) Hello again :) > Sometimes technical Debian discussions (mailing lists, bug reports, > blog posts, etc.) become personal flame-wars. > > Do you think current frequency/amount of heated discussions is > acceptable for the Debian project? > What would you do to reduce those? One way to cool a heated discussion is to add a lot of ice on it. Very few of our communication media really need to be repsonsive in real time. Especially on our mailing lists, I would not mind if the admins would have a big red button that would suddenly delay any email posted there of a couple of hours. I think that some mailing list systems implement that capacity. Of course, self-cooling is much more friendly. Even in constructive threads, I try to limit myself to one or two messages per day when they are on central mailing lists. I really invite the other subscribers to do so. In order to get as many insights as possible, we must remember to keep the door open to other contributors. And if after two days of absence, there is a 100-mails thread in their mailbox, I think that the door is closed. Also, as a DPL I will make an effort to prepare neutral summaries that resurect important discussions that had a productive part, but were killed because one part of the thread exploded in a deluge of emails. It is important that people have the guarantee that their opinion will be taken into account even if there has already been 50 emails exchanged by other persons. This will be another incentive for everybody to just press the delete button and let things cool down. I would also welcome much stricter policy about voluminous off-topic discussions, and invite the listmasters to ban for a couple of days people engaging in this behaviour. Many personal flame-wars fall under this category. In addition, I think that we should reduce our institutional tolerance to aggression and insults. We already often underestimate how we can hurt others with simple words and direct criticisms. Attacks are unacceptable. This said I think that everybody loses control sometimes in their life, and we should welcome sincere excuses. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100315151317.ga32...@kunpuu.plessy.org
Re: Question to all Candidates: Heated discussions
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 02:40:32AM +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
> Do you think current frequency/amount of heated discussions is
> acceptable for the Debian project? What would you do to reduce those?
Acceptable? No. Normal? To some extent, yes.
Debian has a history of inflammable mailing lists, and in particular
inflammable -devel. Having been around for a while, I feel that nowadays
mailing list flames are way more bearable in Debian than, say, 5 years
ago. As Marga stated, the main problem of that is that it makes the fun
go away and eventually leads to people taking breaks and, in extreme
cases, resigning due to frustration.
The DPL has no particular power to resolve flames, but it must set a
good example in: not participating in ad hominem discussions, stating
publicly that specific kinds of posts are not acceptable, mailing
privately DDs which post them. Maybe the DPL "hat" can give a bit more
force to those activity, but ultimately only if a significant amount of
people start doing all these we will see a difference.
At the same time, we should think at the next generation of DDs (we have
been around for long enough to imagine being there ten years from now,
right?). As an Application Manager, I've noticed that there is quite
some margin of "coaching" in the NM process, in addition to question /
answers and technical skill checks. That is a point where we might
benefit from introducing some "good lectures" such as the Debian
Community Guidelines (drafter by Enrico Zini), which we've really never
tried. Having applicants read them, discuss them with their AM, and
possibly sign them, will be a small step which we might start benefiting
from a few years from now.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...| ..: | Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: Question to all Candidates: Heated discussions
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: > Do you think current frequency/amount of heated discussions is > acceptable for the Debian project? Even though the mailing lists climate is much better than what it was 5 years ago, I think that it still sometimes gets too aggressive, and when it does, it reduces the 'fun' factor, thus reducing productivity. > What would you do to reduce those? I think that the most important thing is keeping a positive climate. Appreciating what the other person has said and done before starting to criticize. We can't hammer this into people, but we can teach by example. Also, when a discussion becomes a flamewar, I think it's useful to talk privately to the parts involved and ask them to stop for a moment to see the big picture. I think that the flamewar problem is rooted in an old concept that Debian is ok with flamewars. The only way to get rid of this concept is getting people that participate in flamewars to understand that Debian is NOT ok with them. We could do this with a renewed Code of Conduct as has been proposed over and over these past years, but I think that social pressure is much more effective than the Code of Conduct itself. -- Besos, Marga -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e8bbf0361003140739p3aaa5666t19396af9ba293...@mail.gmail.com
