Re: [Emc-users] [Emc-developers] Code of Conduct
On 6/29/21 12:57 PM, andy pugh wrote: Yes, I read that, and is saddened me. But in more than just the obvious way, because that means that some of us have been acting in a way that upset Kirk, but if you asked us I would bet that not one of us would think that we had. I am not sure that a CoC is any help there, until Kirk said what he said I had always considered this mailing list to be friendly, and that I was already behaving according to the CoC. I totally agree there, for one IF it was on the list, we all would have seen something ... aaand someone might have said something about said toxic remarks. It is unlikely that it was "out of band", but possible it was sent directly. BUT In the latter case, the risk the toxic person is running is that it would be posted on the list anyway (which would expose it) or it would be forwarded to an admin/moderator. Also, if someone has something to complain about, speak up and say what it is no one else has noticed. Also, there is no way a CoC is going to prevent people from experiencing something as toxic or prevent them from getting their feelings hurt. (and there's no way you can make everyone happy, the world simply doesn't work that way, there will always be people that are unhappy, complain, or both) So yeah, I totally agree with what you said. ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] [Emc-developers] Code of Conduct
>I am not sure that a CoC is any help there, until Kirk said what he >said I had always considered this mailing list to be friendly, and >that I was already behaving according to the CoC. I have not noticed any of the problems that Kirk mentioned, but maybe I'm blind, too easy going, inclined too much to give people the benefit of the doubt? To your point that lots of people seem to join, only a few seem to post once and then disappear, I hesitate to use the term lurkers. Sometimes joining a list is the only way to get access to the archives, once a person does and is able to search they may find their questions have been answered, so no need to post or maybe just once for clarification of something that wasn't addressed fully? I don't post much because, unless I have a pertinent reply to a question, or something to ask (that doesn't prove I'm stupid ). I'll leave the airways clear. I've decided to change that and if someone posts a really useful piece of information in response to someone else's question, or even because they're just documenting their journey I'm going to write and tell them so and say thanks. That's way more than my 2 cents worth Martin ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] [Emc-developers] Code of Conduct
On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 at 19:47, Jeff Epler wrote: > At the same time, it's good to be mindful of how the advice and help we > give will be perceived; I think we should take to heart Kirk's message > in this thread about toxic behavior. Kirk has been in this community a > long time. Yes, I read that, and is saddened me. But in more than just the obvious way, because that means that some of us have been acting in a way that upset Kirk, but if you asked us I would bet that not one of us would think that we had. I am not sure that a CoC is any help there, until Kirk said what he said I had always considered this mailing list to be friendly, and that I was already behaving according to the CoC. -- atp "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1912 ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] [Emc-developers] Code of Conduct
On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 07:19:08PM +0100, andy pugh wrote: > On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 at 16:39, andy pugh wrote: > > > I largely agree, apart from prohibiting "answering outside the scope > > of the question" > > Thanks for reconsidering this clause, Seb. I see a number of reasonable folks here concerned about how this rule would be interpreted and applied, and I don't mind seeing it removed. I talked to one of the community moderators at Adafruit, where most of the wording was adopted from. It sounds like there was a specific need for it there, and those circumstances don't apply to LinuxCNC. At the same time, it's good to be mindful of how the advice and help we give will be perceived; I think we should take to heart Kirk's message in this thread about toxic behavior. Kirk has been in this community a long time. How many more people simply left the community when they arrived and got unhelpful help, likely with a dose of contempt? How much more vibrant could the community have been today if that is not how it happened? We've got stuff to work on, y'all. Communities are work to maintain, just like software is. Jeff ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
