Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:21 PM, wu wei wrote: >> You don't know me > > No, I really do. Then tell me more about myself...doc. Your behaviour isn't as clever or as masking as you think > it is. It's intended to be involved, witty, and as informed as I can be on a topic by someone I'm conversing with. And to knw when I don't know, or remember something. You're a sad, lonely, desperate person No, I'm fine a s a monk until recently, when medical, and faith issues arose, and for your information, I've been laid quite a few times, and won't have a problem doing so again. I've been out here 6-7 years getting my life together without chasing pussy. who I would genuinely feel > sorry for if you could stop acting like a self-righteous cunt for long > enough. Not self righteous, again wrong. I've been the bad guy, and now I have to watch out for them, which seems self righteous, but it's merely the fact that I have to have a good public persona now. > > But that's never going to happen; you've convinced yourself that arrogant > superiority Go get to know a real few arrogant individuals, with superiority complexes before you comment. If anything, I have an inferiority complex that comes out when I'm downed by someone. is how to succeed in this world, so you better prepare yourself > now for the shitty, sad life that's going to give you. It's been that way in my socioeconomic upbringing I'm trying to overcome, so you're preaching to the choir. > > Spoiler alert: you're going to die alone and unloved. Doubt it. After 6-7 years of leaving sluts, and whores alone, I've realized I need to be secure emotionally, physically, financially, and spiritually. Go insult a troll, because I like to fish off the top of the bridge. Well above trash such as yourself who like to bring people down for fun due to their own superiority complexes. -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 2012-10-17, Dwight Hutto wrote: >> Instead of "diabetic", try inserting the word "black" or "female". >> There's no shame in those either, yet I think that the offensiveness >> of either of those words used in that context should be obvious. > > To take it a little further, what if I said I got gypped. I think it > goes to gypsy's. Was it racist? I told a girl friend once that my laptop had been purloined, and she thought I was maligning her cat. Maybe not the same thing. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 10/18/12 6:43 AM, David Hutto wrote: On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: David, While I acknowledge and appreciate your efforts to be less aggressive on this list, I think you have crossed a line by forwarding the contents of an obviously personal email containing CLEARLY PRIVATE MATTERS to a public list without permission, without even anonymising it. I get that it was a in a thread, and we;'re always told to respond all, unless otherwise asked, and they didn't directly ask, so I responded back to the list like the etiquette dictates. I know that you have apologized for this later in the email, and I appreciate that, but I would like to explicitly state some of the expectations of etiquette for this list. I don't mean to chastise excessively. I'm afraid that you were either misinformed, or you misinterpreted what you were told. When someone sends you an email that is *only addressed to you*, you should not forward that to the list without getting explicit permission. It is possible that someone just forgot to include the list, but it's also quite likely that they meant it only for you, particularly when it is of a more personal nature. Etiquette dictates that you should not assume that they meant to include the list. If you are in doubt, you must ask. This rule trumps others if you think there is a conflict in interpretation. If you do make a private response, it is always a good idea to explicitly state so, but the lack of such a statement is not an excuse for the recipient to make the email public. The default assumption must be that they meant to send it to exactly those people they actually sent it to. Thank you for listening. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 10/18/2012 02:19 AM, rusi wrote: > > > IOW the robustness principle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robustness_principle > is as good for human networking as for computers. > > The catch to that is that the software that is liberally accepting anything is quite vulnerable to attacks. Windows has a checksum in the exe header that's been there since the MSDOS days, and to the best of my knowledge has never been checked by the loader. So even accidental file corruption goes unnoticed. Likewise IP and other protocol accept all sorts of retries and fragments, and since different OS's overlay those pieces with differing rules, it's quite common for different OS's to see different versions of the packets after reconstruction. So Intrusion detection software (sort of like anti-virus) can be fooled. Goals have changed over the years, and what was a good idea 20 years ago is pretty painful now. I suppose the human analogy might be the trusting people who believe any scammer that comes along. As for me, I'd rather be sometimes fooled than never to trust anyone. So, although I can argue against it, I pretty much agree with the robustness principle. -- DaveA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 18, 11:27 am, David Hutto wrote: > > [BTW This was enunciated 2000 years ago by a clever chap: Love your > > enemies; drive them crazy > > That only works if they're not already insane. > Otherwise you're just prodding a cornered beast. Usually but not necessarily http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angulimala#Story -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
: On 18 October 2012 02:19, rusi wrote: > I understood that your original post started after Etienne's outburst > against Steven. Ah, I see. It was intended as a general request for politeness, but yes, IIRC that was the exchange that prompted it. > IOW the robustness principle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robustness_principle > is as good for human networking as for computers. Never thought of it as applying to humans ... that's rather good. Not universally applicable, but then neither is it for computers. -[]z. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 2:19 AM, rusi wrote: > On Oct 18, 10:18 am, Zero Piraeus wrote: >> : >> >> On 18 October 2012 00:36, rusi wrote: >> >> > Unfortunately, I feel this whole discussion/thread has got derailed: >> > Zero you started this thread about aggressive behavior. It does not >> > seem to me that this was the case you were talking of, was it? >> >> Sorry, but I'm having trouble parsing that sentence. Could you rephrase it? > > I understood that your original post started after Etienne's outburst > against Steven. > David's outbursts are relatively harmless. > I tried to talk gently to him > http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2012-September/631949.html > And then gave up > http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2012-September/631950.html > > Not that I mind: People much wiser than we have expressed that war is > the most horrible thing in the universe and David is by his own > admission a war-damaged individual. > > If Steven chooses to engage him thats his call > If Alex chooses to fight with him thats his > I am betting that in the end, rurpy's suggestion -- Ignoring is the > best policy -- or Ben's -- Respond carefully, minimally and with > caution -- is what everyone will have to come to. > This does not mean I dont wish him well, just that I realize that the > sphere of my action and influence are intrinsically limited. > > And all this misses the point that you started this thread (I think) > with Etienne-Steven in mind not David-RestOfTheWorld. > > (Assuming this conjecture) I would like to say: > Etienne is not a 'dick' or a 'troll' just a human being with the same > buggy wetware that we all have whose logic goes: If you call me an > asshole (when justified) I'll call you can asshole (even if not). > Likewise Alex calling David racist may be justified but is not > helpful. > > IOW the robustness principle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robustness_principle > is as good for human networking as for computers. > > [BTW This was enunciated 2000 years ago by a clever chap: Love your > enemies; drive them crazy That only works if they're not already insane. Otherwise you're just prodding a cornered beast. ] -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 18, 10:18 am, Zero Piraeus wrote: > : > > On 18 October 2012 00:36, rusi wrote: > > > Unfortunately, I feel this whole discussion/thread has got derailed: > > Zero you started this thread about aggressive behavior. It does not > > seem to me that this was the case you were talking of, was it? > > Sorry, but I'm having trouble parsing that sentence. Could you rephrase it? I understood that your original post started after Etienne's outburst against Steven. David's outbursts are relatively harmless. I tried to talk gently to him http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2012-September/631949.html And then gave up http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2012-September/631950.html Not that I mind: People much wiser than we have expressed that war is the most horrible thing in the universe and David is by his own admission a war-damaged individual. If Steven chooses to engage him thats his call If Alex chooses to fight with him thats his I am betting that in the end, rurpy's suggestion -- Ignoring is the best policy -- or Ben's -- Respond carefully, minimally and with caution -- is what everyone will have to come to. This does not mean I dont wish him well, just that I realize that the sphere of my action and influence are intrinsically limited. And all this misses the point that you started this thread (I think) with Etienne-Steven in mind not David-RestOfTheWorld. (Assuming this conjecture) I would like to say: Etienne is not a 'dick' or a 'troll' just a human being with the same buggy wetware that we all have whose logic goes: If you call me an asshole (when justified) I'll call you can asshole (even if not). Likewise Alex calling David racist may be justified but is not helpful. IOW the robustness principle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robustness_principle is as good for human networking as for computers. [BTW This was enunciated 2000 years ago by a clever chap: Love your enemies; drive them crazy] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > David, > > While I acknowledge and appreciate your efforts to be less aggressive on > this list, I think you have crossed a line by forwarding the contents of > an obviously personal email containing CLEARLY PRIVATE MATTERS to a > public list without permission, without even anonymising it. > I get that it was a in a thread, and we;'re always told to respond all, unless otherwise asked, and they didn't directly ask, so I responded back to the list like the etiquette dictates. > Not cool mate, not cool. > > The first amendment doesn't excuse this. You don't get to shout "Fire!" > in a crowded theatre either. That's an over exaggeration of whats going on. > > I think you owe Wu Wei, and Alex, apologies. But only for thinking that it's always reply all, and I do apologize, but they should have directly requested it in the email. If you follow the discussions here, again, it's always you should 'reply all'. > > Re-adding the list to a clearly Python-related question to the list is > marginally okay. (I normally wouldn't do it, but some people do.) Adding > the list to a personal comment is not. You know damn good and well opinions flutter like butterflies around here. > > And quite frankly, I sympathise with how hard your life has been, Don't, it's made me a better person to see the very worst people in life, be kind of a bad ass, and become better at being a stable person. It made me who I'm becoming, even if who I am now is just a transitional. but > this isn't your personal support group. There is such a thing as too much > sharing. It was mainly a business image, and wanting to revise myself, which I'm doing constantly. Most here are professionals, so I asked, and in the middle of a small flame war. > > My personal advice is that I think you need to take a break for a couple > of days and then come back focused on Python, rather than on defending > yourself against real or imagined slights. I'm not your dad and I'm not > sending you to your room, but sometimes a man has to know when it's best > to just walk away and let things cool off, regardless of who is right and > who is wrong. > I'm trying, but I do like to defend myself line for line. I can cool off, but can they lay off while I'm doing it, and do the same themselves? -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
David, While I acknowledge and appreciate your efforts to be less aggressive on this list, I think you have crossed a line by forwarding the contents of an obviously personal email containing CLEARLY PRIVATE MATTERS to a public list without permission, without even anonymising it. Not cool mate, not cool. The first amendment doesn't excuse this. You don't get to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theatre either. I think you owe Wu Wei, and Alex, apologies. Re-adding the list to a clearly Python-related question to the list is marginally okay. (I normally wouldn't do it, but some people do.) Adding the list to a personal comment is not. And quite frankly, I sympathise with how hard your life has been, but this isn't your personal support group. There is such a thing as too much sharing. My personal advice is that I think you need to take a break for a couple of days and then come back focused on Python, rather than on defending yourself against real or imagined slights. I'm not your dad and I'm not sending you to your room, but sometimes a man has to know when it's best to just walk away and let things cool off, regardless of who is right and who is wrong. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
: On 18 October 2012 00:36, rusi wrote: > Unfortunately, I feel this whole discussion/thread has got derailed: > Zero you started this thread about aggressive behavior. It does not > seem to me that this was the case you were talking of, was it? Sorry, but I'm having trouble parsing that sentence. Could you rephrase it? ... I've just been sitting here horrified for the last half hour, trying to work out if there's anything productive I can say, either onlist or privately, to help defuse this situation. And ... well, probably not, but here goes anyway: David: I believe that you are trying to engage positively with this forum. I also believe that you have a tendency to misinterpret some comments as personal attacks[1], and to respond by "giving [at least] as good as you get". I don't think that's working out in the way you intend, and I think you'd improve your own standing here by taking a step back when you perceive an attack, counting to ten, taking a deep breath, and any other applicable cliché that generally gets trotted out in situations like this. Sometimes they're clichés because they're true. Alex23: I agree that publishing private correspondence is a breach of etiquette. I also think that continuing to engage with David over this isn't going to help anyone, at least while you're both so pissed off. Got to dash - I think they need me to oversee some Middle East peace talks ;-) -[]z. [1] A trait I share, and struggle to overcome. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 10/18/2012 12:42 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Dwight Hutto wrote: On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: Common misconception. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the *making of any law* that restricts certain freedoms. It does not have ANYTHING to do with "I have first amendment rights to say whatever I like". Your constitutional opinion, but not everyone's. And I quote: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or -->abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press<--; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." That's one entire sentence. "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom..." - it's ONLY preventing Congress's actions. The Constitution was subsequently applied by the Supreme Court to state governments as well, but it's still only restricting state and federal law-makers. ChrisA My god people, can we just drop this and move on already? No one's opinions are going to be changed, and there's no magic bullet argument that will shut down someone you disagree with. Swallow your bile and carry on. Sorry to be jumping in like this, I'm just frustrated that THIS is what's the community is going to spend its time on. Seems rather much a waste. --Jonathan (Also, someone was an idiot on the internet. OH NO! MUST BRING FORTH MY EPIC TYPING FINGERS. Isn't there an xckd about this?) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:31 AM, alex23 wrote: > On Oct 18, 2:26 pm, Dwight Hutto wrote: >> But you apparently want freedom of speech. > > I can't even begin to address this idiocy. Then don't(your idiocy acknowledges your own misunderstanding), because you don't want the freedom to speak publicly, so don't reply, or send messages anymore, because your stance is weak, and your word meaningless if you don't like that particular amendment. > >> As I've mentioned before...people can start arguing, and one replies >> off list, and then goes back on the list after a private e-mail, and >> says ahah, see how they're acting, and they never saw the private >> reply you sent. > > And yet that's *exactly* what *you* have just done. No, I included everything that was said, no editing. So stop the bullshit PR attack, you're not good at it. > Should I forward to this list all of the offensive private posts that > you've sent me? Of course not, because you sent them to me privately Unaware, and of course send them, and make sure they're not falsified data, because I have google copies of what I've sent.. > and they're *not relevant to this list*. That's why they have an OT term.It's just conversation other than the mundane "How do you print a digit?" -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 18, 9:06 am, alex23 wrote: > On Oct 18, 2:02 pm, Dwight Hutto wrote: > [a public response to a private email] > > I really don't appreciate you pushing public a *private email > exchange*, especially when it has nothing whatsoever to do with this > list. Speaking generally I agree. Specifically one of the points discussed in this same thread -- correcting/reprimanding unacceptable public-forum behavior with private emails -- this looks like a textbook example of why/when it does not work and serves to underscore rurpy's point that ignoring may be the best tactic in the long run. Unfortunately, I feel this whole discussion/thread has got derailed: Zero you started this thread about aggressive behavior. It does not seem to me that this was the case you were talking of, was it? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:24 AM, alex23 wrote: > On Oct 18, 2:21 pm, Dwight Hutto wrote: >> Usually, etiquette dictates, that we hit "reply all". > > Then why did you actively re-add the list as a recipient when I had > removed it? How was I supposed to know you removed it. Usually it's an accident to hit just 'reply'. Check around, and ask. -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Dwight Hutto wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: >> Common misconception. The First Amendment to the United States >> Constitution prohibits the *making of any law* that restricts certain >> freedoms. It does not have ANYTHING to do with "I have first amendment >> rights to say whatever I like". > > Your constitutional opinion, but not everyone's. > > And I quote: > > "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, > or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or -->abridging the freedom > of speech, or of the press<--; or the right of the people peaceably to > assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." That's one entire sentence. "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom..." - it's ONLY preventing Congress's actions. The Constitution was subsequently applied by the Supreme Court to state governments as well, but it's still only restricting state and federal law-makers. ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 18, 2:26 pm, Dwight Hutto wrote: > But you apparently want freedom of speech. I can't even begin to address this idiocy. > As I've mentioned before...people can start arguing, and one replies > off list, and then goes back on the list after a private e-mail, and > says ahah, see how they're acting, and they never saw the private > reply you sent. And yet that's *exactly* what *you* have just done. Should I forward to this list all of the offensive private posts that you've sent me? Of course not, because you sent them to me privately and they're *not relevant to this list*. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Dwight Hutto wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:06 AM, alex23 wrote: >>> On Oct 18, 2:02 pm, Dwight Hutto wrote: >>> [a public response to a private email] >>> >>> I really don't appreciate you pushing public a *private email >>> exchange*, especially when it has nothing whatsoever to do with this >>> list. >> >> Usually, etiquette dictates, that we hit "reply all". > > That's not actually true either. The convention is to reply to the > list with material that is edifying to the list, or to the author > alone if the situation calls for it. Using reply-all sends the author > a copy as well as putting it on-list, which is unnecessary (unless > it's likely the author isn't subscribed). It's completely unnecessary > to include the list in what's not of interest. > > And here I am, posting on-list something that's completely necessary. > (sigh* Alex, Dwight, can you two please cool down a bit? A little > calmness would improve this discussion significantly, methinks. > Sometimes an e-mail doesn't convey tone, or pitch of voice. If it were face to face, instead of text, things would be much different. -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Dwight Hutto wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:50 PM, wu wei wrote: >>> Did you really forward a private email to a public mailing list without >>> permission? >>> >>> Are you really that fucking ignorant of the law? >> >> This is a public discussion. Maybe you just need to stand behind a >> loophole in the law, but the first amendment overrides that. > > Common misconception. The First Amendment to the United States > Constitution prohibits the *making of any law* that restricts certain > freedoms. It does not have ANYTHING to do with "I have first amendment > rights to say whatever I like". Your constitutional opinion, but not everyone's. And I quote: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or -->abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press<--; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." It is restrictions on Congress and the > state governments in the US of A. > > Even if python-list were purely US-based, it still wouldn't apply. > > Deliberately forwarding a private email without permission is a breach > of courtesy, more than of the law. How many emails end in hit 'reply all'? It may be possible to make a civil > case of the breach of privacy in some jurisdictions, but mainly it's > just a gross discourtesy. It wasn't stated that that was their intent. I though it was the regular hit 'reply', instead of hit 'reply all' (Assuming, that is, that the email wasn't > actually intended to be public. I've at times responded on-list to a > private email, but with a tag at the top explaining that.) > That I failed to do. To say please hit 'reply all' -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:11 AM, alex23 wrote: > On Oct 18, 2:05 pm, Dwight Hutto wrote: >> This is a public discussion. Maybe you just need to stand behind a >> loophole in the law, but the first amendment overrides that. > > I'm not in America, so your constitution means nothing to me. But you apparently want freedom of speech. > >> Plus, that is the standard. We discuss this as a community. You never >> stated you wanted it private, ad if you had, it would have remained >> that way. > > I *sent you a private response* because it wasn't relevant to the > list. You chose to re-include the list, No, lots of people hit 'reply' instead of 'reply all'. Read around, it gets stated all the time. The main response is don't reply privately, keep it on list, unless otherwise stated. which is an active decision > you had to make. Based on certain list's rules. Hit 'reply all' That is not acceptable behaviour, nor is it the > "standard". That's debatable, unless you implied that was your intention. As I've mentioned before...people can start arguing, and one replies off list, and then goes back on the list after a private e-mail, and says ahah, see how they're acting, and they never saw the private reply you sent. -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Dwight Hutto wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:06 AM, alex23 wrote: >> On Oct 18, 2:02 pm, Dwight Hutto wrote: >> [a public response to a private email] >> >> I really don't appreciate you pushing public a *private email >> exchange*, especially when it has nothing whatsoever to do with this >> list. > > Usually, etiquette dictates, that we hit "reply all". That's not actually true either. The convention is to reply to the list with material that is edifying to the list, or to the author alone if the situation calls for it. Using reply-all sends the author a copy as well as putting it on-list, which is unnecessary (unless it's likely the author isn't subscribed). It's completely unnecessary to include the list in what's not of interest. And here I am, posting on-list something that's completely necessary. (sigh* Alex, Dwight, can you two please cool down a bit? A little calmness would improve this discussion significantly, methinks. ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 18, 2:21 pm, Dwight Hutto wrote: > Usually, etiquette dictates, that we hit "reply all". Then why did you actively re-add the list as a recipient when I had removed it? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Dwight Hutto wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:50 PM, wu wei wrote: >> Did you really forward a private email to a public mailing list without >> permission? >> >> Are you really that fucking ignorant of the law? > > This is a public discussion. Maybe you just need to stand behind a > loophole in the law, but the first amendment overrides that. Common misconception. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the *making of any law* that restricts certain freedoms. It does not have ANYTHING to do with "I have first amendment rights to say whatever I like". It is restrictions on Congress and the state governments in the US of A. Even if python-list were purely US-based, it still wouldn't apply. Deliberately forwarding a private email without permission is a breach of courtesy, more than of the law. It may be possible to make a civil case of the breach of privacy in some jurisdictions, but mainly it's just a gross discourtesy. (Assuming, that is, that the email wasn't actually intended to be public. I've at times responded on-list to a private email, but with a tag at the top explaining that.) ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:06 AM, alex23 wrote: > On Oct 18, 2:02 pm, Dwight Hutto wrote: > [a public response to a private email] > > I really don't appreciate you pushing public a *private email > exchange*, especially when it has nothing whatsoever to do with this > list. Usually, etiquette dictates, that we hit "reply all". -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 18, 2:05 pm, Dwight Hutto wrote: > This is a public discussion. Maybe you just need to stand behind a > loophole in the law, but the first amendment overrides that. I'm not in America, so your constitution means nothing to me. > Plus, that is the standard. We discuss this as a community. You never > stated you wanted it private, ad if you had, it would have remained > that way. I *sent you a private response* because it wasn't relevant to the list. You chose to re-include the list, which is an active decision you had to make. That is not acceptable behaviour, nor is it the "standard". -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 18, 2:02 pm, Dwight Hutto wrote: [a public response to a private email] I really don't appreciate you pushing public a *private email exchange*, especially when it has nothing whatsoever to do with this list. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:50 PM, wu wei wrote: > Did you really forward a private email to a public mailing list without > permission? > > Are you really that fucking ignorant of the law? This is a public discussion. Maybe you just need to stand behind a loophole in the law, but the first amendment overrides that. Plus, that is the standard. We discuss this as a community. You never stated you wanted it private, ad if you had, it would have remained that way. -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:47 PM, wu wei wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Dwight Hutto > wrote: >> >> It's intended to be involved, witty, and as informed as I can be > > > You fail on every level here. According to your opinion. > >> >> No, I'm fine a s a monk until recently, when medical, and faith issues >> arose, and for your information, I've been laid quite a few times, and >> won't have a problem doing so again. > > > Yeah, you're full of confidence in yourself, you're not defensive at all. Confidence is a defence against individuals who want to cherry pick, and bring you down with propaganda that lacks anymore than a textbook approach...show some innovation please. > >> I've been out here 6-7 years getting my life together without chasing >> pussy. > > > When you use terms like "chasing pussy", that's probably a good indication > of why it's been 7 years since you last had any satisfying interaction with > a woman. That was a character flaw i had..."doc". I had to rid an addiction to saving women who were in bad situations, and clarify my mind as to who I want as a prime mate. > >> Not self righteous, again wrong. I've been the bad guy, and now I have >> to watch out for them, which seems self righteous, but it's merely the >> fact that I have to have a good public persona now. > > > But you _don't_ have a good public persona. You come across as someone > desperately trying to convince people that you're smarter and better than > you are. > Again, just your opinion of a few threads. When insulted, you either insult back, or ascert your intelligence. I took the higher ground. >> Go get to know a real few arrogant individuals, with superiority >> complexes before you comment. > > > I have. I'm speaking from direct experience here, and you demonstrate a lot > in common with such people. You lack serious perspective n this subject, so stop trying to say I'm arrogant. >> >> If anything, I have an inferiority complex that comes out when I'm >> downed by someone. > > > Then don't react the way you do, because it doesn't do you any favours. > >> It's been that way in my socioeconomic upbringing I'm trying to >> overcome, so you're preaching to the choir. > > > Oh boo hoo, you've had pain in your life, you're surely the only person on > the planet. > I give myself the same fucking thought everytime I have to feel symptoms which I',m trying to afford the cost to diagnose , and fix. So cry me a fucking river, and boohoo about my vulgar language. >> >> Doubt it. After 6-7 years of leaving sluts, and whores alone, I've >> realized I need to be secure emotionally, physically, financially, and >> spiritually. > > > You don't see the hypocrisy in claiming you're after _spiritual_ and > _emotional_ security and calling women "sluts and whores"? > You should have met them. They may have become more, but that's who I was trying to save from other bad relationships. Use the little psychology you understand, and you'll see I was trying to save my mother. > You're going to die alone with that attitude. > >> >> Go insult a troll, because I like to fish off the top of the bridge. > > > Things like this really aren't as witty as you think. Your ego couldn't take the insult, could it? > >> >> Well above trash such as yourself who like to bring people down for >> fun due to their own superiority complexes. > > > No, I just like highlighting the huge discrepancies between what people > think & say they are and how they behave, especially when that person is a > hugely disruptive asshole who thinks the incomprehensible crap they write > assists people in learning Python. Provide some references please, instead of a blanketed insult. > > You're in serious need of self-reflection at a level I'm not convinced > you're capable of. You should hear some thought projection I have about my own past behaviour then. Maybe you should start another crybaby thread on the You mean a request for social critique that improves myself, then I'll throw a temper tantrum. Maybe you wanna come watch, or maybe you have the balls to participate(but that would be just my old behaviour). > Python list to find out whether everyone else agrees. Or hell, you're the > CEO of your company, I'm sure you have dozens if not hundreds of employees > you can lean on for moral support, right? Just started, so I'm a startup, and you just insulted the majority of the list with good dreams of being a productive citizen of society. -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 9:02 PM, alex23 wrote: > On Oct 18, 9:53 am, Dwight Hutto wrote: >> To take it a little further, what if I said I got gypped. I think it >> goes to gypsy's. Was it racist? > > Ignorant racism is still racism. No it's not, that 's why it's called ignorant...you just didn't know what it meant at the time, and correct yourself afterwards. Historical racism is still racism. No shit Sherlock. > >> It seems that we get too politically correct when we want to cherry >> pick a comment for propaganda against someone. > > I think a person who tells others not to be sensitive to his actions > towards them shouldn't post so many complaints about how other people > are acting toward him. -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 18, 9:53 am, Dwight Hutto wrote: > To take it a little further, what if I said I got gypped. I think it > goes to gypsy's. Was it racist? Ignorant racism is still racism. Historical racism is still racism. > It seems that we get too politically correct when we want to cherry > pick a comment for propaganda against someone. I think a person who tells others not to be sensitive to his actions towards them shouldn't post so many complaints about how other people are acting toward him. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 18/10/2012 01:44, Oscar Benjamin wrote: It came across to me as an offensive comment both to you and to people with Asperger's that I would not tolerate generally. It is retracted so I hold no ill will and don't want to dwell on it. In fact the very quick retraction is a good thing to happen in relation to the many things discussed above in this thread. Oscar Can we drop this please guys? Being diagnosed earlier this year with Asperger was the best thing that ever happened to me, but being constantly reminded about my younger son who has the condition far worse than me and is partially deaf to boot is getting up my nose. -- Cheers. Mark Lawrence. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 18 October 2012 00:17, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 14:10:34 -0700, rurpy wrote: > >> On 10/17/2012 02:28 PM, Oscar Benjamin wrote:> On 17 October 2012 19:16, >> Chris Angelico wrote: On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:48 AM, wrote: >On 10/16/2012 08:45 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> Except that you've made a 180- >> degree turn from your advice to "ignore" bad behaviour, but >> apparently didn't notice that *sending private emails* is not by any >> definition "ignoring". So apparently you don't actually agree with >> your own advice. > > Do you have Asberger's by any chance? Can you understand that I said > "ignore" in the context of public discussions in this > newsgroup/maillist? That's nothing to do with Asperger's. Ignoring something/someone does not include sending a private message. What you may be trying to say is that we should refrain from publicly responding to bad behaviour, which is not the same thing. If you want to pull a Humpty Dumpty and use "ignore" to mean "not respond to in public", then go ahead, I'm not stopping you - but do please make it clear somewhere in your post. >>> >>> I would also assume that ignoring a post means not replying on or off >>> list. >> >> Then I hope my reply to Chris clarified that for you as well. >> >>> Moreover, I think it's unfortunate for you to make this comment with an >>> irrelevant reference to Asperger's syndrome. I'll give you the benefit >>> of the doubt that you didn't mean it this way but the comment is easily >>> interpreted as being disparaging to people with Asperger's. >> >> Yes, on rereading that, I agree it was uncalled for and I retract it and >> apologize to any who may have been offended by it. > > Excuse me, I think that anybody who was offended by it needs to take a > long, hard look at themselves. Would you be offended if Rurpy asked "Are > you diabetic?" There's no more shame in being Aspie than there is in > being diabetic, or allergic to wheat, or colour blind. (rurpy, I know you already regret what you said so I'm not trying to rub it in but I want to respond to what Steven said) Steven, I almost followed that up with a post pointing out that it was also quite offensive to you. But then I thought: No, Steven can look after himself! You're right, of course. There is nothing wrong with Asperger's. I don't see much wrong with saying "Do you have Asberger's by any chance?" (apart from the South-Park style mis-spelling) but I do see something wrong with following it up with a patronising "Can you understand..." as if only the other party having Asperger's can explain your inability to understand one another. To put it another way, I could say: You're an idiot. Why can't you understand the simple things I say? which is rude but it's rude at one (relevant) person. Instead I could choose to say: Do you have Down's? Can your mongoloid brain just not understand me? which is rude at so many irrelevant people (I find it difficult to write that since my cousin and some other very lovely people I know have Down's but I that's roughly how I interpreted rurpy's comment the *first* time I read it). It came across to me as an offensive comment both to you and to people with Asperger's that I would not tolerate generally. It is retracted so I hold no ill will and don't want to dwell on it. In fact the very quick retraction is a good thing to happen in relation to the many things discussed above in this thread. Oscar -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 10/17/2012 05:39 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> Excuse me, I think that anybody who was offended by it needs to take a >> long, hard look at themselves. Would you be offended if Rurpy asked "Are >> you diabetic?" > > If the question were sincere, no. On the other hand, if it were a > rhetorical question with the implication that only diabetics could > possibly be so obtuse, then yes, it would be offensive. > > Instead of "diabetic", try inserting the word "black" or "female". > There's no shame in those either, yet I think that the offensiveness > of either of those words used in that context should be obvious. The question *was* sincere. Some people with Asberger's tend to take words and expressions too literally. I know because it it is a problem I often have. Nevertheless I should not have raised the issue in the newsgroup, especially when criticizing Steven for not just asking, but asserting, that someone else's writings were the products of excessive drug use. This list is not the place to ask or speculate about personal traits of posters; rather only on message contents. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
: On 17 October 2012 19:53, Dwight Hutto wrote: > To take it a little further, what if I said I got gypped. I think it > goes to gypsy's. Was it racist? "Racist" is a word with competing definitions, and intent is a factor in some of them ... but yes, many people are offended by such use of the word "gyp", just as they would be by similar use of "jew" as a verb. -[]z. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
> Instead of "diabetic", try inserting the word "black" or "female". > There's no shame in those either, yet I think that the offensiveness > of either of those words used in that context should be obvious. To take it a little further, what if I said I got gypped. I think it goes to gypsy's. Was it racist? Reneged has always been renegotiable, yet one time I accidently said to a good black friend of mine that something was nig rigged, and thought it meant negotiably rigged, but it wasn't racist. Recently, I told a guy to ramit, because his name or pseudo name, I thought, was ramit, and got called a racist for it. It seems that we get too politically correct when we want to cherry pick a comment for propaganda against someone. Sometimes it's just ridiculous. -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
: On 17 October 2012 19:17, Steven D'Aprano wrote: [on Asperger's] > Excuse me, I think that anybody who was offended by it needs to take a > long, hard look at themselves. Would you be offended if Rurpy asked "Are > you diabetic?" There's no more shame in being Aspie than there is in > being diabetic, or allergic to wheat, or colour blind. In the culture in which I grew up, at least, dropping "do you have developmental disorder X"? into a fairly combative reply like the one under discussion would definitely be considered rude, not because there's any shame in having developmental disorder X, but because it's a plausible assumption that the questioner thinks there is [and that that's why they used the question as a retort]. I don't mean to imply that this was rurpy's intent [especially given that he's withdrawn the comment]. But to me it did initially feel more like "Are you blind?" than "Are you diabetic?" ... and the former is more commonly used as an insult than a genuine enquiry. -[]z. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Excuse me, I think that anybody who was offended by it needs to take a > long, hard look at themselves. Would you be offended if Rurpy asked "Are > you diabetic?" If the question were sincere, no. On the other hand, if it were a rhetorical question with the implication that only diabetics could possibly be so obtuse, then yes, it would be offensive. Instead of "diabetic", try inserting the word "black" or "female". There's no shame in those either, yet I think that the offensiveness of either of those words used in that context should be obvious. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 14:10:34 -0700, rurpy wrote: > On 10/17/2012 02:28 PM, Oscar Benjamin wrote:> On 17 October 2012 19:16, > Chris Angelico wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:48 AM, wrote: On 10/16/2012 08:45 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Except that you've made a 180- > degree turn from your advice to "ignore" bad behaviour, but > apparently didn't notice that *sending private emails* is not by any > definition "ignoring". So apparently you don't actually agree with > your own advice. Do you have Asberger's by any chance? Can you understand that I said "ignore" in the context of public discussions in this newsgroup/maillist? >>> >>> That's nothing to do with Asperger's. Ignoring something/someone does >>> not include sending a private message. What you may be trying to say >>> is that we should refrain from publicly responding to bad behaviour, >>> which is not the same thing. If you want to pull a Humpty Dumpty and >>> use "ignore" to mean "not respond to in public", then go ahead, I'm >>> not stopping you - but do please make it clear somewhere in your post. >> >> I would also assume that ignoring a post means not replying on or off >> list. > > Then I hope my reply to Chris clarified that for you as well. > >> Moreover, I think it's unfortunate for you to make this comment with an >> irrelevant reference to Asperger's syndrome. I'll give you the benefit >> of the doubt that you didn't mean it this way but the comment is easily >> interpreted as being disparaging to people with Asperger's. > > Yes, on rereading that, I agree it was uncalled for and I retract it and > apologize to any who may have been offended by it. Excuse me, I think that anybody who was offended by it needs to take a long, hard look at themselves. Would you be offended if Rurpy asked "Are you diabetic?" There's no more shame in being Aspie than there is in being diabetic, or allergic to wheat, or colour blind. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 10/17/2012 02:28 PM, Oscar Benjamin wrote:> On 17 October 2012 19:16, Chris Angelico wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:48 AM, wrote: >>>On 10/16/2012 08:45 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: Except that you've made a 180- degree turn from your advice to "ignore" bad behaviour, but apparently didn't notice that *sending private emails* is not by any definition "ignoring". So apparently you don't actually agree with your own advice. >>> >>> Do you have Asberger's by any chance? Can you understand that >>> I said "ignore" in the context of public discussions in this >>> newsgroup/maillist? >> >> That's nothing to do with Asperger's. Ignoring something/someone does >> not include sending a private message. What you may be trying to say >> is that we should refrain from publicly responding to bad behaviour, >> which is not the same thing. If you want to pull a Humpty Dumpty and >> use "ignore" to mean "not respond to in public", then go ahead, I'm >> not stopping you - but do please make it clear somewhere in your post. > > I would also assume that ignoring a post means not replying on or off list. Then I hope my reply to Chris clarified that for you as well. > Moreover, I think it's unfortunate for you to make this comment with > an irrelevant reference to Asperger's syndrome. I'll give you the > benefit of the doubt that you didn't mean it this way but the comment > is easily interpreted as being disparaging to people with Asperger's. Yes, on rereading that, I agree it was uncalled for and I retract it and apologize to any who may have been offended by it. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 17 October 2012 19:16, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:48 AM, wrote: >>On 10/16/2012 08:45 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >>> Except that you've made a 180- >>> degree turn from your advice to "ignore" bad behaviour, but apparently >>> didn't notice that *sending private emails* is not by any definition >>> "ignoring". So apparently you don't actually agree with your own advice. >> >> Do you have Asberger's by any chance? Can you understand that >> I said "ignore" in the context of public discussions in this >> newsgroup/maillist? > > That's nothing to do with Asperger's. Ignoring something/someone does > not include sending a private message. What you may be trying to say > is that we should refrain from publicly responding to bad behaviour, > which is not the same thing. If you want to pull a Humpty Dumpty and > use "ignore" to mean "not respond to in public", then go ahead, I'm > not stopping you - but do please make it clear somewhere in your post. I would also assume that ignoring a post means not replying on or off list. Moreover, I think it's unfortunate for you to make this comment with an irrelevant reference to Asperger's syndrome. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't mean it this way but the comment is easily interpreted as being disparaging to people with Asperger's. Generally I think that using psychological disorders or medical conditions as part of ad hominem risks offending people for no good reason. If you mean to accuse Steven of pedantry then why not use words like "pedantic" rather then words like "autistic". Oscar -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 1:20:15 PM UTC-6, rurpy wrote: > On 10/17/2012 12:16 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: >[...] > Ignore it *on the list*. Quick addendum: I wrote earlier (in some post in this thread I don't have time to dig up now) that the above possibly should not apply when one is the target of (a perceived) offensive post. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 10/17/2012 12:16 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:48 AM, rurpy wrote: >>On 10/16/2012 08:45 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >>> Except that you've made a 180- >>> degree turn from your advice to "ignore" bad behaviour, but apparently >>> didn't notice that *sending private emails* is not by any definition >>> "ignoring". So apparently you don't actually agree with your own advice. >> >> Do you have Asberger's by any chance? Can you understand that >> I said "ignore" in the context of public discussions in this >> newsgroup/maillist? > > That's nothing to do with Asperger's. Ignoring something/someone does > not include sending a private message. What you may be trying to say > is that we should refrain from publicly responding to bad behaviour, > which is not the same thing. If you want to pull a Humpty Dumpty and > use "ignore" to mean "not respond to in public", then go ahead, I'm > not stopping you - but do please make it clear somewhere in your post. I thought (and think now) that it was quite clear in context that "ignore" was to be taken relative to what was being discussed -- responding in this list. Did you seriously think I meant you weren't supposed even read it? That you must not print it out and burn it in effigy? That you can't mention it to a friend as an example of something that pissed you off that day? That you can't write a blog entry about it? That you can't report it to law enforcement if you thought it was threatening? I see responding privately to the poster in exactly the same vein. Ignore it *on the list*. I hope that makes it clear enough? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:48 AM, wrote: >On 10/16/2012 08:45 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> Except that you've made a 180- >> degree turn from your advice to "ignore" bad behaviour, but apparently >> didn't notice that *sending private emails* is not by any definition >> "ignoring". So apparently you don't actually agree with your own advice. > > Do you have Asberger's by any chance? Can you understand that > I said "ignore" in the context of public discussions in this > newsgroup/maillist? That's nothing to do with Asperger's. Ignoring something/someone does not include sending a private message. What you may be trying to say is that we should refrain from publicly responding to bad behaviour, which is not the same thing. If you want to pull a Humpty Dumpty and use "ignore" to mean "not respond to in public", then go ahead, I'm not stopping you - but do please make it clear somewhere in your post. Impenetrability! ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 10/16/2012 08:45 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:10:17 -0700, rurpy wrote:
>
>> On 10/16/2012 10:49 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>> > On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:27:48 -0700, rurpy wrote about trolls and
>>> > dicks:
>>
>> No, I wrote about trolls. "dicks" is a highly emotive and almost
>> totally subjective word
>
> As opposed to "troll", which is unemotional and objective? Not.
Not not. Please be careful of binary thinking. I did
not say "troll" is unemotional and objective; I said it
was much less so than "dick". It has a fairly specific
meaning (see the wikipedia article for example.)
>> that I would not use in a rational discussion.
>
> I would. If someone is acting like a dick, why not call them by the word
> that most accurately describes their behaviour?
Because (as I said) it is highly subjective and hence describes
not their behavior but rather your opinion of their behavior.
> I see nothing troll like in Dwight "call me David, but I can't be
> bothered changing my signature" Hutto's behaviour. He doesn't seem to be
> trolling, in either sense: he doesn't appear to be making provocative
> statements for the purpose of making people think, nor does he seem to be
> making inflammatory statements to get a rise out of people. He seems to
> genuinely want to help people, in a clumsy, aggressive, and I believe
> often intoxicated way.
>
> So it seems to me that you are wrongly applying the term "troll" as a
> meaningless pejorative to anyone who behaves badly.
Hardly meaningless. It seems to me there is a spectrum
ranging from those who post for the pure enjoyment of starting
an argument, through those who have a on-topic reason to
post but have a lot of attitude, through those who usually
keep their attitude under control but go off when provoked
to those who really are clueless and have no idea that their
attitude is offensive to anyone.
This is further complicated by the fact that some offensive
behaviors are offensive to some and not to others, and worse,
some people are offended by any opinion they disagree with.
Finally there are lots of people, some drive-by, some with
lots of python knowledge and regulars here, who just enjoy
arguing. That trait is not restricted to trolls.
So regardless of the category of "troll", telling them to
stop is more likely to result in a response ranging from a
repetition of what they already said to "go screw yourself",
followed by dozens of more responses telling them everything
from "stop" to "you're an asshole".
You are right that I lumped them all under the label "troll".
I will do so through the rest of this post since I don't
have any other good labels.
>> Perhaps you were trying to be amusing?
>
> Certainly not.
>
>> The best advise is to ignore such posts and encourage others to do
>> the same.
> [...]
>>> > How should somebody distinguish between "I am being shunned for
>>> > acting like a dick", and "I have not received any responses because
>>> > nobody has anything to add"?
>>
>> Because you sent them private email telling them that?
>
> My, what a ... unique ... concept of "ignore such posts" you have.
What's so unique about it? I have seen such advice dozens
of times including in this list. (Oh wait, I just read ahead.
I'll respond below).
> So far, this has been the best advice you have given so far. My opinion
> is that there is a graduated response to dickish behaviour:
>
> * send a message telling the person they are acting unacceptably,
> preferably privately on a first offence to avoid public shaming
> (when possible -- lots of people aren't privately contactable
> for many reasons other than that they are trolls);
>
> * if the behaviour continues, make a public comment condemning
> that behaviour generally without engaging directly in a debate
> or "tit-for-tat" argument with the person.
That's great except that,
* Many people feel compelled to make the same public comment
* Tit-for-tat arguments usually do ensue.
> And for those who value their own peace and quiet over the community
> benefit:
>
> * block or killfile posts from that person so they don't
> have to be seen, preferably publicly.
* And all too often that is followed up with a public **plonk**.
(I really don't care that you (generic) killfiled someone.
I'm quite capable of deciding who to read on my own.)
> When I killfile someone, I tend to make it expire after a month or three,
> just in case they mend their ways. Call me Mr Softy if you like.
>
> [...]
>>> > If I believe that your behaviour ("giving lousy advice") is causing
>>> > great harm to this community, and *I don't say anything*, how will
>>> > you know to change your behaviour?
>>
>> If that was how you thought, then you would be someone I hope would
>> follow my advice. Because you would clearly seem to be unable to
>> distinguish between difference of opinion on a subject relevant to the
>> newsgroup, and
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Grant Edwards wrote: > I disagree! I think occasional off-topic meta-arguments can be > interesting and entertaining. > > Yow! Am I having a meta-meta-discussion yet? Now we get to the meat of the discussion... It's like I was explaining to one of my brothers the other week: When in doubt, go meta. He had a whole lot of data and he had to give a presentation about it (for a course he was doing, and I'm not wholly sure the 'o' belongs in there). He wanted to do something that everyone else wouldn't be doing, so I suggested going meta. He said everyone else would be doing that, so I advised him to add another meta-level - for instance, do a presentation on how many people go meta in their presentations. I still don't know whether he dared to do so :) ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 2012-10-17, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 10/16/2012 11:47 PM, Kristen J. Webb wrote: > >> I will say that my perusal of this list has been >> informative. I also receive more email from this >> list than any other I subscribe to. > > You could instead access it as a newsgroup via news.gmane.org. That > keeps posts isolated and you only download those item you request. News > readers should collapse threads to a single line and allow you to mark > all as read. I'm a big fan of gmane (though I happen to read this "forum" as comp.language.python from a Usenet server). Newsreaders often have more sophisticated mechanisms to allow you to filter out certain people/topics/whaterver that don't interest you. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! ... this must be what at it's like to be a COLLEGE gmail.comGRADUATE!! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 2012-10-17, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 21:25:38 -0700, alex23 wrote: > >> I really don't get people who feel they need to share their opinion when >> that opinion is that other people shouldn't share theirs. > > +1 QOTW > > It makes me laugh when newcomers to this group stick their head up to > chastise us for arguing about the culture of this group. The irony is > that that is *precisely* what they too are doing. > > In an ideal world, we'd all agree on what counts as acceptable behaviour, > and stick to it, and discuss nothing but Python coding problems. I disagree! I think occasional off-topic meta-arguments can be interesting and entertaining. Yow! Am I having a meta-meta-discussion yet? -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! -- I love KATRINKA at because she drives a gmail.comPONTIAC. We're going away now. I fed the cat. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 17/10/2012 07:24, Steven D'Aprano wrote: And more importantly, welcome to democracy -- this is not a dictatorship, Putting my pedantic hat on but there are few if any true democracies in the world. Most governments are run on (mis)representative lines. Which reminds me I must restart my campaign to be the first world president. Seven votes at the last count, another 3.5 billion and I'm first past the post. -- Cheers. Mark Lawrence. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > In an ideal world, we'd all agree on what counts as acceptable behaviour, > and stick to it, and discuss nothing but Python coding problems. But we > don't live in an idea world, and there are disagreements and people > behaving badly, and arguments about such, and meta-arguments about the > arguments. > > Welcome to humanity. Every negative is a corrupted version of a positive. Why are there these sorts of arguments? Because people care about the quality of posts. Why have meta-arguments? Because Python programmers have the sorts of brains that are good at (and enjoy) such. > And more importantly, welcome to democracy -- this is not a dictatorship, > there is no Supreme Glorious Leader who decides what is on- and off- > topic, no Thought Police to ban you for straying from the straight and > narrow of what is allowed. And thank goodness for that. I've been on > lists that do have such policies, and they tend to give lousy advice > badly and have a culture of group-think. Correction: Welcome to anarchy. In a democracy, we'd all vote and anyone voted out would be banned. Otherwise, absolutely agree. > Sure, it's frustrating to have to hit delete on a bunch of posts you > don't care about. But that's true regardless of the topic or the list. > Last night I deleted about 300 emails about designing a new asynchronous > library that I had no desire to take part in. Did I post an angry screed > calling it BS? No I did not, because I'm aware that even if I'm not > interested in it, it is a part of Python culture and *somebody* needs to > deal with it. I'm just glad its not me. Heh, I'm skipping all those posts too - but I'm confident Python will be the better for that discussion. I'm on many mailing lists. Some quiet, some noisy, some public, some private (and don't knock the private ones - it's WAY better to use Mailman than huge cc: lists), some courteous, some rude. Not one of them is useless to the world. If you don't like python-list, maybe there's another forum that's more to your liking - Python is big enough to have several. :) ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 17, 11:15 am, alex23 wrote: > On Oct 17, 2:43 pm, rusi wrote: > > > Let me try to restate alex without the barb. > > Do you offer this service for hire? :) Hmm now thats an idea… Are you offering to hire? [Considering how many jobs Ive changed, never know whats next!] Rusi -- http://blog.languager.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 21:25:38 -0700, alex23 wrote: > I really don't get people who feel they need to share their opinion when > that opinion is that other people shouldn't share theirs. +1 QOTW It makes me laugh when newcomers to this group stick their head up to chastise us for arguing about the culture of this group. The irony is that that is *precisely* what they too are doing. In an ideal world, we'd all agree on what counts as acceptable behaviour, and stick to it, and discuss nothing but Python coding problems. But we don't live in an idea world, and there are disagreements and people behaving badly, and arguments about such, and meta-arguments about the arguments. Welcome to humanity. And more importantly, welcome to democracy -- this is not a dictatorship, there is no Supreme Glorious Leader who decides what is on- and off- topic, no Thought Police to ban you for straying from the straight and narrow of what is allowed. And thank goodness for that. I've been on lists that do have such policies, and they tend to give lousy advice badly and have a culture of group-think. Sure, it's frustrating to have to hit delete on a bunch of posts you don't care about. But that's true regardless of the topic or the list. Last night I deleted about 300 emails about designing a new asynchronous library that I had no desire to take part in. Did I post an angry screed calling it BS? No I did not, because I'm aware that even if I'm not interested in it, it is a part of Python culture and *somebody* needs to deal with it. I'm just glad its not me. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 10/16/2012 11:47 PM, Kristen J. Webb wrote: I will say that my perusal of this list has been informative. I also receive more email from this list than any other I subscribe to. You could instead access it as a newsgroup via news.gmane.org. That keeps posts isolated and you only download those item you request. News readers should collapse threads to a single line and allow you to mark all as read. -- Terry Jan Reedy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 17, 9:25 am, alex23 wrote: > On Oct 17, 1:54 pm, "Kristen J. Webb" wrote: > > > It sucks for me to spend so much time filtering this BS. > > Yet you then chose to participate in a discussion about it. Because > that's what people do to discuss suitable behaviour. > > I really don't get people who feel they need to share their opinion > when that opinion is that other people shouldn't share theirs. Ha Ha! Let me try to restate alex without the barb. What exactly do you (Kristen) find to be BS? If its the one-line endorsement from David to Steven, Ive no comment or opinion If its the hundreds of lines of Steven's post, it would be good if your mail-quoting singles that out. If its Zero's OP then I am sorry, but many of us think that something needs to be said. In case its the length of Steven's post here's my attempt at improving his S/N ration: There are dicks and there are trolls. Behavior can be improved by calling right things by the right names. [My addition]: 1. There are no dicks and trolls; there is dick-ing and trolling 2. jmf's objections to python's unicode is classic trolling. David's abusive language is dicking. Using the right name helps to find the right strategy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
"Kristen J. Webb" writes: > What the f**k! I thought that subscribing to a list would promote > education, enlightenment, and a shared communal effort to make things > better for things (python) related. Yes, that's the focus of this thread: how best to engage in a shared communal effort to make things better for Python-related discussion. > It sucks for me to spend so much time filtering this BS. The thread helpfully tells you what it's about in the subject field, and remains remarkably on-topic by that description. Filter appropriately. If it sucks for you to receive a high-volume discussion forum in your email, you may want to use a better email client with more sophisticated filtering capability. Or you can subscribe to the forum as a Usenet newsgroup, news:comp.lang.python>. > Let's be honest, does any of this crap have anything to do with > python, it's promotion, Yes, I think this discussion does have direct relevance to supporting the promotion of Python. My views on how have been made elsewhere in this same thread. -- \ “Teach a man to make fire, and he will be warm for a day. Set a | `\ man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.” | _o__) —John A. Hrastar | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 17, 1:54 pm, "Kristen J. Webb" wrote: > Let's be honest, does any of this crap have > anything to do with python, it's promotion, > or resolving anything related to making it > one of the most exciting languages I have > ever seen since C? Python is more than the language, it's the community as well. Discussing acceptable behaviour on a community mailing list is highly relevant. Wanting to stop behaviour that could potentially drive people away from the language is very much about promotion. > It sucks for me to spend so much time filtering this BS. Yet you then chose to participate in a discussion about it. Because that's what people do to discuss suitable behaviour. I really don't get people who feel they need to share their opinion when that opinion is that other people shouldn't share theirs. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
As a casual observer of this list (and many others)
I can only say...
What the f**k! I thought that subscribing to
a list would promote education, enlightenment,
and a shared communal effort to make things better
for things (python) related.
It sucks for me to spend so much time filtering this BS.
I will say that my perusal of this list has been
informative. I also receive more email from this
list than any other I subscribe to.
Let's be honest, does any of this crap have
anything to do with python, it's promotion,
or resolving anything related to making it
one of the most exciting languages I have
ever seen since C?
Jeesh!
K
On 10/16/12 9:01 PM, Dwight Hutto wrote:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:10:17 -0700, rurpy wrote:
On 10/16/2012 10:49 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:27:48 -0700, rurpy wrote about trolls and
dicks:
No, I wrote about trolls. "dicks" is a highly emotive and almost
totally subjective word
As opposed to "troll", which is unemotional and objective? Not.
that I would not use in a rational discussion.
I would. If someone is acting like a dick, why not call them by the word
that most accurately describes their behaviour?
I see nothing troll like in Dwight "call me David, but I can't be
bothered changing my signature" Hutto's behaviour. He doesn't seem to be
trolling, in either sense: he doesn't appear to be making provocative
statements for the purpose of making people think, nor does he seem to be
making inflammatory statements to get a rise out of people. He seems to
genuinely want to help people, in a clumsy, aggressive, and I believe
often intoxicated way.
So it seems to me that you are wrongly applying the term "troll" as a
meaningless pejorative to anyone who behaves badly.
Perhaps you were trying to be amusing?
Certainly not.
The best advise is to ignore such posts and encourage others to do
the same.
[...]
How should somebody distinguish between "I am being shunned for
acting like a dick", and "I have not received any responses because
nobody has anything to add"?
Because you sent them private email telling them that?
My, what a ... unique ... concept of "ignore such posts" you have.
So far, this has been the best advice you have given so far. My opinion
is that there is a graduated response to dickish behaviour:
* send a message telling the person they are acting unacceptably,
preferably privately on a first offence to avoid public shaming
(when possible -- lots of people aren't privately contactable
for many reasons other than that they are trolls);
* if the behaviour continues, make a public comment condemning
that behaviour generally without engaging directly in a debate
or "tit-for-tat" argument with the person.
And for those who value their own peace and quiet over the community
benefit:
* block or killfile posts from that person so they don't
have to be seen, preferably publicly.
When I killfile someone, I tend to make it expire after a month or three,
just in case they mend their ways. Call me Mr Softy if you like.
[...]
If I believe that your behaviour ("giving lousy advice") is causing
great harm to this community, and *I don't say anything*, how will
you know to change your behaviour?
If that was how you thought, then you would be someone I hope would
follow my advice. Because you would clearly seem to be unable to
distinguish between difference of opinion on a subject relevant to the
newsgroup, and inflammatory trolling. Further you see the situation in
extreme terms ("*great harm*") and one in which only a single point of
view (your's) is acceptable.
As opposed to only your opinion being acceptable? Why on earth should I
follow your advice if I think it is bad advice?
We can't both be right[1]. We can't simultaneously confront bad
behaviour, and ignore bad behaviour. I think your advice is bad, and has
the potential to kill this community. You think my advice is bad, and has
the potential to kill this community. Except that you've made a 180-
degree turn from your advice to "ignore" bad behaviour, but apparently
didn't notice that *sending private emails* is not by any definition
"ignoring". So apparently you don't actually agree with your own advice.
You would be bordering on delusional by
thinking your post would somehow change my "behavior".
It's not necessarily about changing your behaviour. (Well, in this case,
it's less about you than about Dwight Hutto specifically and badly-
behaved posters in general.) It's about sending a message that the
behaviour is unacceptable.
The primary purpose of that message is to discourage *others* from
following in the same behaviour. Nothing will kill a forum faster than
trolls and dicks feeding off each other, until there is nothing left but
trolls and dicks. A single troll doesn't do much harm -- few of them have
the energy to spam a news group for long periods, drowning out useful
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 16, 9:27 pm, ru...@yahoo.com wrote: > On 10/14/2012 10:36 PM, alex23 wrote:> On Oct 15, 1:22 pm, ru...@yahoo.com > wrote: > > >> Thus when a member of this esteemed group > >> was recently attacked as racist, for punning another member's > >> name when responding somewhat heatedly, > > > Again, there is a difference between "attacking" someone "as racist" > > and *criticising* their *comments* as *possibly* racist. When the > > person whose name was being punned said that they themselves were > > unsure whether it was intended as a racial attack, then the behaviour > > was worth commenting on. > > I just went back and reread what you and some others wrote > to make sure I was not misremembering and am comfortable > sticking with my description. (FTR, your initial response > was "Please, don't be a dick.") > > My intent was not to reargue that issue but to point out > that different people have differing ideas on what is > "acceptable" and "unacceptable" here and that if Ben > Finney's advice to respond (in moderation) whenever one > reads an "unacceptable" opinion is taken, one will create > an environment in which troll's will flourish. > > The best advise is to ignore such posts and encourage > others to do the same. Trolling posts certainly exist. And when 'troll' becomes a short-form for 'one-who-regularly-trolls' its fine as long as we remember that its a metonymy. When we forget http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMEe7JqBgvg should help by: 1. Showing how to deal with trolling 2. Reminding that such beings dont actually exist except as caricature Coming to current misbehavior on the list -- specifically Etienne's outburst against Steven, I am reminded of a similar situation a year ago Long thread -- Relevant starting is here http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2011-May/604893.html Abusive post http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2011-May/604914.html Maybe easier to read http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/17dca3bf467c9001/c53102a45da19386 The last thing that John Bokma posted (to the best of my knowledge) was: > Ben Finney writes: > >>> Get a life. Or better, just fuck off and die. It will improve both the >>> world and the Python community, of which you are nothing but a little, >>> smelly shitstain. >> >> That abuse is entirely unwelcome in this community, against any person. >> Please desist. > You should have spoken up sooner, especially as the spokes person of > "this" community. But every bully has is fan club. > > -- > John Bokma If we think/feel that John Bokma was trolling then driving him off the list was a good thing. If not we need to question whether those actions were collectively sound. Specifically Steven's post that triggered Etienne's misbehavior is this: On Oct 5, 5:22 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 14:10:46 -0400, Etienne Robillard wrote: > > Dear list, > > > Due to lack of energy and resources i'm really sad to announce the > > removal ofnotmmfrom pypi and bitbucket. > > Well that's just rude. Even if you don't intend to maintain the software > any more, why are you removing it from pypi? Since you say you are a fan > of Open Source software, just flag it as unmaintained and leave it for > somebody else to pick up. > > If you are going to abandon the project, release it on PyPI with a dual > MIT and GPL licence, and let it be taken over by somebody else. > > If you were looking for sympathy here, starting off by removing your > project from free hosting, then complaining that you can't pay for the > non-free hosting, was NOT the right way to do so. : > Steven I read Etienne as saying: 'I need money (or at least some sympathy)' Steven is unequivocally saying 'You are not getting it from here' Technically he is correct; humanly I am not so sure. [I have a personal regret that I did not rebut Steven's rudeness with a '... that is not necessarily the view of the whole group...' I hesitated to do so because I am not adept at giving sympathy without giving false hope and keeping the post at reasonable length. Anyhow this (too long) post is an attempt at correcting that.] In the earlier (Quora-thread) Terry Reedy's voice was most balanced and sane; unfortunately covered in the 'dog-pile' of all the rest. Hopefully he will put in his word here as well. [And Zero thank you for starting this thread] Rusi - http://blog.languager.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:10:17 -0700, rurpy wrote:
>
>> On 10/16/2012 10:49 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>> > On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:27:48 -0700, rurpy wrote about trolls and
>>> > dicks:
>>
>> No, I wrote about trolls. "dicks" is a highly emotive and almost
>> totally subjective word
>
> As opposed to "troll", which is unemotional and objective? Not.
>
>
>> that I would not use in a rational discussion.
>
> I would. If someone is acting like a dick, why not call them by the word
> that most accurately describes their behaviour?
>
> I see nothing troll like in Dwight "call me David, but I can't be
> bothered changing my signature" Hutto's behaviour. He doesn't seem to be
> trolling, in either sense: he doesn't appear to be making provocative
> statements for the purpose of making people think, nor does he seem to be
> making inflammatory statements to get a rise out of people. He seems to
> genuinely want to help people, in a clumsy, aggressive, and I believe
> often intoxicated way.
>
> So it seems to me that you are wrongly applying the term "troll" as a
> meaningless pejorative to anyone who behaves badly.
>
>
>> Perhaps you were trying to be amusing?
>
> Certainly not.
>
>
>> The best advise is to ignore such posts and encourage others to do
>> the same.
> [...]
>>> > How should somebody distinguish between "I am being shunned for
>>> > acting like a dick", and "I have not received any responses because
>>> > nobody has anything to add"?
>>
>> Because you sent them private email telling them that?
>
> My, what a ... unique ... concept of "ignore such posts" you have.
>
> So far, this has been the best advice you have given so far. My opinion
> is that there is a graduated response to dickish behaviour:
>
> * send a message telling the person they are acting unacceptably,
> preferably privately on a first offence to avoid public shaming
> (when possible -- lots of people aren't privately contactable
> for many reasons other than that they are trolls);
>
> * if the behaviour continues, make a public comment condemning
> that behaviour generally without engaging directly in a debate
> or "tit-for-tat" argument with the person.
>
>
> And for those who value their own peace and quiet over the community
> benefit:
>
> * block or killfile posts from that person so they don't
> have to be seen, preferably publicly.
>
> When I killfile someone, I tend to make it expire after a month or three,
> just in case they mend their ways. Call me Mr Softy if you like.
>
>
> [...]
>>> > If I believe that your behaviour ("giving lousy advice") is causing
>>> > great harm to this community, and *I don't say anything*, how will
>>> > you know to change your behaviour?
>>
>> If that was how you thought, then you would be someone I hope would
>> follow my advice. Because you would clearly seem to be unable to
>> distinguish between difference of opinion on a subject relevant to the
>> newsgroup, and inflammatory trolling. Further you see the situation in
>> extreme terms ("*great harm*") and one in which only a single point of
>> view (your's) is acceptable.
>
> As opposed to only your opinion being acceptable? Why on earth should I
> follow your advice if I think it is bad advice?
>
> We can't both be right[1]. We can't simultaneously confront bad
> behaviour, and ignore bad behaviour. I think your advice is bad, and has
> the potential to kill this community. You think my advice is bad, and has
> the potential to kill this community. Except that you've made a 180-
> degree turn from your advice to "ignore" bad behaviour, but apparently
> didn't notice that *sending private emails* is not by any definition
> "ignoring". So apparently you don't actually agree with your own advice.
>
>
>> You would be bordering on delusional by
>> thinking your post would somehow change my "behavior".
>
> It's not necessarily about changing your behaviour. (Well, in this case,
> it's less about you than about Dwight Hutto specifically and badly-
> behaved posters in general.) It's about sending a message that the
> behaviour is unacceptable.
>
> The primary purpose of that message is to discourage *others* from
> following in the same behaviour. Nothing will kill a forum faster than
> trolls and dicks feeding off each other, until there is nothing left but
> trolls and dicks. A single troll doesn't do much harm -- few of them have
> the energy to spam a news group for long periods, drowning out useful
> posts.
>
>
>> But even if you had a more rational response
>
> *raises eyebrow*
>
>> and saved that reaction for
>> actual trolling and not someone who simply disagreed with you, I ask
>> again, what makes you think your response will change that troll's
>> behavior, when in actuality, your kind of response is exactly what most
>> trolls hope to elicit? Did it help in the case I mentioned?
>
> As I said, I do not believe that Dwight Hutto is a troll. I believe he i
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 02:45:04 +, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Dwight "call me David, but I can't be bothered changing my signature" > Hutto's behaviour. I withdraw this dig at David Hutto. It was unnecessary, and it turns out, wrong as he has now changed his signature. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:10:17 -0700, rurpy wrote:
> On 10/16/2012 10:49 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> > On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:27:48 -0700, rurpy wrote about trolls and
>> > dicks:
>
> No, I wrote about trolls. "dicks" is a highly emotive and almost
> totally subjective word
As opposed to "troll", which is unemotional and objective? Not.
> that I would not use in a rational discussion.
I would. If someone is acting like a dick, why not call them by the word
that most accurately describes their behaviour?
I see nothing troll like in Dwight "call me David, but I can't be
bothered changing my signature" Hutto's behaviour. He doesn't seem to be
trolling, in either sense: he doesn't appear to be making provocative
statements for the purpose of making people think, nor does he seem to be
making inflammatory statements to get a rise out of people. He seems to
genuinely want to help people, in a clumsy, aggressive, and I believe
often intoxicated way.
So it seems to me that you are wrongly applying the term "troll" as a
meaningless pejorative to anyone who behaves badly.
> Perhaps you were trying to be amusing?
Certainly not.
>>> >> The best advise is to ignore such posts and encourage others to do
>>> >> the same.
[...]
>> > How should somebody distinguish between "I am being shunned for
>> > acting like a dick", and "I have not received any responses because
>> > nobody has anything to add"?
>
> Because you sent them private email telling them that?
My, what a ... unique ... concept of "ignore such posts" you have.
So far, this has been the best advice you have given so far. My opinion
is that there is a graduated response to dickish behaviour:
* send a message telling the person they are acting unacceptably,
preferably privately on a first offence to avoid public shaming
(when possible -- lots of people aren't privately contactable
for many reasons other than that they are trolls);
* if the behaviour continues, make a public comment condemning
that behaviour generally without engaging directly in a debate
or "tit-for-tat" argument with the person.
And for those who value their own peace and quiet over the community
benefit:
* block or killfile posts from that person so they don't
have to be seen, preferably publicly.
When I killfile someone, I tend to make it expire after a month or three,
just in case they mend their ways. Call me Mr Softy if you like.
[...]
>> > If I believe that your behaviour ("giving lousy advice") is causing
>> > great harm to this community, and *I don't say anything*, how will
>> > you know to change your behaviour?
>
> If that was how you thought, then you would be someone I hope would
> follow my advice. Because you would clearly seem to be unable to
> distinguish between difference of opinion on a subject relevant to the
> newsgroup, and inflammatory trolling. Further you see the situation in
> extreme terms ("*great harm*") and one in which only a single point of
> view (your's) is acceptable.
As opposed to only your opinion being acceptable? Why on earth should I
follow your advice if I think it is bad advice?
We can't both be right[1]. We can't simultaneously confront bad
behaviour, and ignore bad behaviour. I think your advice is bad, and has
the potential to kill this community. You think my advice is bad, and has
the potential to kill this community. Except that you've made a 180-
degree turn from your advice to "ignore" bad behaviour, but apparently
didn't notice that *sending private emails* is not by any definition
"ignoring". So apparently you don't actually agree with your own advice.
> You would be bordering on delusional by
> thinking your post would somehow change my "behavior".
It's not necessarily about changing your behaviour. (Well, in this case,
it's less about you than about Dwight Hutto specifically and badly-
behaved posters in general.) It's about sending a message that the
behaviour is unacceptable.
The primary purpose of that message is to discourage *others* from
following in the same behaviour. Nothing will kill a forum faster than
trolls and dicks feeding off each other, until there is nothing left but
trolls and dicks. A single troll doesn't do much harm -- few of them have
the energy to spam a news group for long periods, drowning out useful
posts.
> But even if you had a more rational response
*raises eyebrow*
> and saved that reaction for
> actual trolling and not someone who simply disagreed with you, I ask
> again, what makes you think your response will change that troll's
> behavior, when in actuality, your kind of response is exactly what most
> trolls hope to elicit? Did it help in the case I mentioned?
As I said, I do not believe that Dwight Hutto is a troll. I believe he is
merely badly behaved. And yes, I do believe that confronting him has
changed his behaviour, at least for now.
Not immediately, of course. His immediate response was to retaliate and
defend hi
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
First of all, I believe this is the *perfect* post to try and
keep discussion calm. If trusted members cannot keep a good tone of voice
and have an understanding (even if disagreeing) stance on a post
about aggressive language, it does not shine brightly as a message to
others.
On 16 October 2012 22:12, wrote:
> On 10/16/2012 02:17 PM, Prasad, Ramit wrote:> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:27:48 -0700, rurpy wrote about trolls and dicks:
> >> If you ignore such posts, how will the poster know they are
> unacceptable?
> >
> > I agree completely. I was about to say that I was fine with meeting
> > known trolls with silence, but what happens when new or infrequent
> > readers see the troll's writing with no one objecting? Are they to
> > ignore the troll or assume that the list condones the troll's words?
>
> You do not give enough credit to people. The vast majority
> of people are capable of recognizing offensive posts and
> recognizing that non-response to them is intentional.
I think you are only right up to a point. Whilst some messages are obvious
trolls, it is a well known phenomena that people respond emphatically to
even the most outrageous of posts, especially if they are new enough not to
know the culture we expect.
> I think it is absurd to think that most normal people will
> see such posts and conclude that all Python programmers
> agree with them. (No time to look it up but I vaguely
> recall a long series of anti-semitic posts here that were
> largely ignored. I've seen no evidence that there are
> people who brand the Python community as anti-semitic.)
>
These are a brilliant example of obvious spam. A quick GMail search for
"Jew" turned up a fair few spread posts that were definitely anti-Semitic.
However, they were posts that lacked any context and had nothing to relate
to Python, this list or anyone on this list. They were so obviously
irrelevant that it would be crazy for anyone to label the list with this.
If these posts were short responses like "Your code's just broken you
stupid Jew", then your point would be more easy to accept. I can imagine
(for it is *the internet*) that someone would take genuine offence and
label *sections* of the Python-List community as anti-semetic.
However, a response of "*Qxrlt* *is a known" + ("spammer" | "troll" |
"bot") to the OP (never talking to the troll for fear of baiting) is likely
to immediately alleviate any risk and cannot, as far as I can see, propose
any significant risk.
>From that point on, every post of theirs in the thread can be ignored
safely. Which is the goal, I guess.
I am going to go on record to say I agree with you that a warning cannot
oft change a troll's behaviour, and a talking to (of any kind) will likely
act as troll bait. However, this does not mean that silence is the best
option.
* Apologies to Qxrlt, whoever may have that pseudo-random character stream
as their nickname
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 10/16/2012 02:17 PM, Prasad, Ramit wrote:> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:27:48 -0700, rurpy wrote about trolls and dicks:
>>
>> > The best advise is to ignore such posts and encourage others to do the
>> > same.
>>
>> If you ignore such posts, how will the poster know they are unacceptable?
>>
>> How should somebody distinguish between "I am being shunned for acting
>> like a dick", and "I have not received any responses because nobody has
>> anything to add"?
>>
>> If I believe that your behaviour ("giving lousy advice") is causing great
>> harm to this community, and *I don't say anything*, how will you know to
>> change your behaviour? How will others know that I do not agree with your
>> advice?
>
> I agree completely. I was about to say that I was fine with meeting
> known trolls with silence, but what happens when new or infrequent
> readers see the troll's writing with no one objecting? Are they to
> ignore the troll or assume that the list condones the troll's words?
You do not give enough credit to people. The vast majority
of people are capable of recognizing offensive posts and
recognizing that non-response to them is intentional. I
think it is absurd to think that most normal people will
see such posts and conclude that all Python programmers
agree with them. (No time to look it up but I vaguely
recall a long series of anti-semitic posts here that were
largely ignored. I've seen no evidence that there are
people who brand the Python community as anti-semitic.)
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 10/16/2012 10:49 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:27:48 -0700, rurpy wrote about trolls and dicks:
No, I wrote about trolls. "dicks" is a highly emotive and
almost totally subjective word that I would not use in a
rational discussion. Perhaps you were trying to be amusing?
>> >> The best advise is to ignore such posts and encourage others to do the
>> >> same.
> >
> > If you ignore such posts, how will the poster know they are unacceptable?
Do you really think that in the vast majority of cases that
the poster is blithely unaware of the inflammatory nature
of their post? The whole point of trolling is to generate
responses by posting something inflammatory. It sounds to
me like your view is that most such posts are made by people
who are simply brand new to the internet (or at least the
civilized parts of it) and thus, when their error is pointed
out, will say thanks and change their ways.
> > How should somebody distinguish between "I am being shunned for acting
> > like a dick", and "I have not received any responses because nobody has
> > anything to add"?
Because you sent them private email telling them that? (And
if you can't do that, maybe you should take it as a hint that
they're not particularly interested in your "help"?)
> > If I believe that your behaviour ("giving lousy advice") is causing great
> > harm to this community, and *I don't say anything*, how will you know to
> > change your behaviour?
If that was how you thought, then you would be someone I hope
would follow my advice. Because you would clearly seem to be
unable to distinguish between difference of opinion on a
subject relevant to the newsgroup, and inflammatory trolling.
Further you see the situation in extreme terms ("*great
harm*") and one in which only a single point of view (your's)
is acceptable. You would be bordering on delusional by
thinking your post would somehow change my "behavior".
But even if you had a more rational response and saved
that reaction for actual trolling and not someone who
simply disagreed with you, I ask again, what makes you
think your response will change that troll's behavior,
when in actuality, your kind of response is exactly what
most trolls hope to elicit? Did it help in the case I
mentioned?
> > How will others know that I do not agree with your
> > advice?
Why is it so important to you that I and others know what
you think? Since you are (usually) a reasonable person I
don't need to read your explicit pronouncement to assume
that you disagree with some repugnant post.
If it were possible to somehow have a single, reasonable
response generated to an offensive post, that would be great.
But I don't think that is possible. Multiple people will
feel the need to take on that duty. Others will feel the
response is not strong enough or doesn't represent their
personal take and post their responses. Some will respond
righteously to non-offensive posts. (The use of "troll"
as a synonym for "I/we don't agree with you" is quite
noticeable in this group.) The perp will inevitably
followup with more offensive posts in response. This
is how things have worked since the invention of mailing
lists and why "don't feed the trolls" has served fairly
well for three decades.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: Aggressive language on python-list
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:27:48 -0700, rurpy wrote about trolls and dicks:
>
> > The best advise is to ignore such posts and encourage others to do the
> > same.
>
> If you ignore such posts, how will the poster know they are unacceptable?
>
> How should somebody distinguish between "I am being shunned for acting
> like a dick", and "I have not received any responses because nobody has
> anything to add"?
>
> If I believe that your behaviour ("giving lousy advice") is causing great
> harm to this community, and *I don't say anything*, how will you know to
> change your behaviour? How will others know that I do not agree with your
> advice?
>
>
I agree completely. I was about to say that I was fine with meeting
known trolls with silence, but what happens when new or infrequent
readers see the troll's writing with no one objecting? Are they to
ignore the troll or assume that the list condones the troll's words?
~Ramit
This email is confidential and subject to important disclaimers and
conditions including on offers for the purchase or sale of
securities, accuracy and completeness of information, viruses,
confidentiality, legal privilege, and legal entity disclaimers,
available at http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/disclosures/email.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:27:48 -0700, rurpy wrote about trolls and dicks:
> The best advise is to ignore such posts and encourage others to do the
> same.
If you ignore such posts, how will the poster know they are unacceptable?
How should somebody distinguish between "I am being shunned for acting
like a dick", and "I have not received any responses because nobody has
anything to add"?
If I believe that your behaviour ("giving lousy advice") is causing great
harm to this community, and *I don't say anything*, how will you know to
change your behaviour? How will others know that I do not agree with your
advice?
--
Steven
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 10/14/2012 10:36 PM, alex23 wrote:> On Oct 15, 1:22 pm, ru...@yahoo.com wrote: >> Thus when a member of this esteemed group >> was recently attacked as racist, for punning another member's >> name when responding somewhat heatedly, > > Again, there is a difference between "attacking" someone "as racist" > and *criticising* their *comments* as *possibly* racist. When the > person whose name was being punned said that they themselves were > unsure whether it was intended as a racial attack, then the behaviour > was worth commenting on. I just went back and reread what you and some others wrote to make sure I was not misremembering and am comfortable sticking with my description. (FTR, your initial response was "Please, don't be a dick.") My intent was not to reargue that issue but to point out that different people have differing ideas on what is "acceptable" and "unacceptable" here and that if Ben Finney's advice to respond (in moderation) whenever one reads an "unacceptable" opinion is taken, one will create an environment in which troll's will flourish. The best advise is to ignore such posts and encourage others to do the same. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 15, 1:22 pm, ru...@yahoo.com wrote: > Thus when a member of this esteemed group > was recently attacked as racist, for punning another member's > name when responding somewhat heatedly, Again, there is a difference between "attacking" someone "as racist" and *criticising* their *comments* as *possibly* racist. When the person whose name was being punned said that they themselves were unsure whether it was intended as a racial attack, then the behaviour was worth commenting on. If anything, I initially *joked* about it as a means of trying to point out the issue in a non-offensive way. If there was any "attacking" going on, it was in the criticised party's responses. > hurt the cause of anti-racism My response had nothing to do with "agendas" and "causes" and everything to do with wanting to keep specific forms of discourse off this list. I had identical issues with the same person's use of "bitch" and "whore"; I cannot begin to fathom how stating that they're unacceptable to use here is in any way damaging to the anti-sexism position, or an attack on the person saying them. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 10/14/2012 03:58 PM, Ben Finney wrote:> Zero Piraeus writes: >[...] > What's needed, IMO, is a difficult balance: there needs to be calm, > low-volume, but firm response to instances of hostile behaviour, making > clear by demonstration – especially to the people only observing the > discussion – that such hostility is unwanted and not to be tolerated in > our community. >[...] The problem with this is that while there may sometimes be a weak consensus, different people have different ideas about what is "wrong". Thus when a member of this esteemed group was recently attacked as racist, for punning another member's name when responding somewhat heatedly, I, according to your view, should have jumped in to point out unfair accusations of racism are not only wrong, but hurt the cause of anti-racism by devaluing such charges when they are legitimate. No, what you propose will only reduce the signal to noise ratio and increase the amount of off-topic arguments. The old tried-and-true advise is still the best: don't feed the trolls. Experience with three decades of mailing lists and usenet has shown that most of them give up and go somewhere else when they don't get a response. Of course this does not apply when you are the one attacked (or perceive you are) -- in that case your advice for a low-key factual response is quite appropriate. (And then drop it.) > To those who feel the need to “fight” the trolls: thank you for caring > enough about the Python community to try to defend it. But I'm concerned > that you tend to pour fuel on the flames yourself, and I hope you can > work to avoid becoming the monster you fight. > >> And, yes, I know bringing it up could be construed as stoking the >> flames ... but, well, "silence = acquiescence" and all that. > > Agreed. Thanks again. No. Silence != acquiescence as a few minutes of thought will show. The fact that it is often repeated does not make it true. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 10/13/2012 09:46 AM, Etienne Robillard wrote: > OT. you obviously has no clue what agressive behavior mean. :-) > > So please continue with the passive tone saying nothing relevant > and login to facebook. There's a saying in English. Hit pigeons flutter. I have not been impressed with your last few posts. In fact your last couple of posts have been irrelevant and unhelpful to say the least. As you are looking for a maintainer to take over your django add-on project, such an attitude is not going to attract developers to take over your baby. Some of this could be the language barrier, but really such posturing isn't necessary. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
: On 14 October 2012 17:58, Ben Finney wrote: > What's needed, IMO, is a difficult balance: there needs to be calm, > low-volume, but firm response to instances of hostile behaviour, making > clear by demonstration – especially to the people only observing the > discussion – that such hostility is unwanted and not to be tolerated in > our community. Yep. I also think such responses are more effective coming from people who already have some weight[1] around here (which was part of the reason I was hesitant to bring it up myself). Good to see a few names I'd put in that bracket appear in this thread :-) -[]z. [1] "Who are you calling fat?" replies in 3, 2 ... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Oct 14, 3:39 pm, Dwight Hutto wrote: > I'm not a know it all, but when attacked personally I defend myself, > and those can turn into flame wars. I'm not wanting this to turn into another round of flames, but I do want to highlight that there's a big difference between being asked to moderate your language on a public list and a personal attack. > Your plonks are irrelevant > These things can get nasty quick. > So if you have virgin eyes, then kill file it > If you want it, bring it Posturing like this doesn't help either and starts to fall into the "aggressive language" territory this thread is concerned with. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
Zero Piraeus writes: > I'm a mostly passive subscriber to this list - my posts here over the > years could probably be counted without having to take my socks off - > so perhaps I have no right to comment, but I've noticed a marked > increase in aggressive language here lately, so I'm putting my head > above the parapet to say that I don't appreciate it. Thanks for speaking up, Zero. You are certainly not alone in this. “Ignore the trolls” is not helpful advice if one wants to maintain a useful and friendly environment. If the hostile behaviour you refer to goes unchallenged, the helpful contributors become drowned out and eventually leave from fatigue. So ignoring trolls is not enough if we want the friendly and useful conversations to continue. Ignoring hostile behaviour also sends the wrong signal to newcomers and casual observers: that this is not a community which cares about actively upholding good standards of behaviour. What's needed, IMO, is a difficult balance: there needs to be calm, low-volume, but firm response to instances of hostile behaviour, making clear by demonstration – especially to the people only observing the discussion – that such hostility is unwanted and not to be tolerated in our community. This is difficult to achieve, though, because if *lots* of people do it, the thread turns into a dogpile that is also unhelpful, and usually departs from civil and rational discussion quickly. All of this turns away more good people (again, often people who otherwise weeren't involved in the particular discussion), so is counter-productive. So my request is: Be selective, and be calm. Don't respond deep in an existing exchange, especially one where many others have already responded to that person. Be selective and only respond when yours will be one of the first in the thread. (And that's not a mandate to have a quick trigger :-) Don't keep responding in a series of exchanges; it makes your messages difficult for newcomers to tell apart from the voluminous noise of the troll. When responding to a troll, don't be inflammatory yourself – that is *exactly* what they seek, a continuation and escalation of the conflict. Point out exactly what you think they're doing wrong, simply and calmly, and don't go on at length. Keep the innocent reader in mind, don't care too much about the troll reading your response. To those who feel the need to “fight” the trolls: thank you for caring enough about the Python community to try to defend it. But I'm concerned that you tend to pour fuel on the flames yourself, and I hope you can work to avoid becoming the monster you fight. > And, yes, I know bringing it up could be construed as stoking the > flames ... but, well, "silence = acquiescence" and all that. Agreed. Thanks again. -- \“Intellectual property is to the 21st century what the slave | `\ trade was to the 16th.” —David Mertz | _o__) | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
I'm not a know it all, but when attacked personally I defend myself, and those can turn into flame wars. Your plonks are irrelevant in terms of an argument ytou shouldn't participate in. These things can get nasty quick. So if you have virgin eyes, then kill file it, but I like to think Ioffer logical reasoning to those who respect a good programming conversation. If you want it, bring it, but it's mainly just regular computer science discussion. -- Best Regards, David Hutto CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
> > A response to someone who quotes a trollbot just stating "*Username* is a > trollbot." where *no* further correspondence occurs doesn't seem like > trollbotbait to me, and it makes it easy for people to know who's been > warned. > If properly trimmed, so there is no reference to the troll/bot or any text from the troll/bot - fine. But any reference to the original will make it harder for those of us who use bayesian-based spam filtering. Tim Delaney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 13 October 2012 22:35, Tim Delaney wrote: > On 14 October 2012 08:22, Roel Schroeven wrote: > >> Zero Piraeus schreef: >> >> : >>> >>> Not sure exactly how to put this ... >>> >>> I'm a mostly passive subscriber to this list - my posts here over the >>> years could probably be counted without having to take my socks off - >>> so perhaps I have no right to comment, but I've noticed a marked >>> increase in aggressive language here lately, so I'm putting my head >>> above the parapet to say that I don't appreciate it. >>> >> >> Same here. I've been lurking here for a number of years, and I've always >> regarded this list as an example of friendly civilized behavior, quite >> exceptional on the Internet. I also have the impression that situation is >> changing for the worse, and it worries me too. > > > If everyone *plonks* the jerks/trolls/bots/etc and no one responds to > them, they won't have an audience and will either go away; act out more > (but no one will see it); or reform and become a useful member of the group > (probably needing to change email addresses to be un-*plonked*). > > The problem is mainly when people respond to them. That's what they want - > it gives them an audience. No matter how much you want to *just this once* > respond to one, resist the urge. > I agree up to here. > And if you can't prevent yourself from replying to someone who has quoted > one in order to tell them that the person is a known troll/bot, tell them > privately, not on the list. > I don't know. If it's not publicly obvious that the person if a trollbot, then other people may miss it. Many doubted 8's being a bot, and if it's not open it may take a lot longer for people to spot the obvious. A response to someone who quotes a trollbot just stating "*Username* is a trollbot." where *no* further correspondence occurs doesn't seem like trollbotbait to me, and it makes it easy for people to know who's been warned. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 14 October 2012 08:22, Roel Schroeven wrote: > Zero Piraeus schreef: > > : >> >> Not sure exactly how to put this ... >> >> I'm a mostly passive subscriber to this list - my posts here over the >> years could probably be counted without having to take my socks off - >> so perhaps I have no right to comment, but I've noticed a marked >> increase in aggressive language here lately, so I'm putting my head >> above the parapet to say that I don't appreciate it. >> > > Same here. I've been lurking here for a number of years, and I've always > regarded this list as an example of friendly civilized behavior, quite > exceptional on the Internet. I also have the impression that situation is > changing for the worse, and it worries me too. If everyone *plonks* the jerks/trolls/bots/etc and no one responds to them, they won't have an audience and will either go away; act out more (but no one will see it); or reform and become a useful member of the group (probably needing to change email addresses to be un-*plonked*). The problem is mainly when people respond to them. That's what they want - it gives them an audience. No matter how much you want to *just this once* respond to one, resist the urge. And if you can't prevent yourself from replying to someone who has quoted one in order to tell them that the person is a known troll/bot, tell them privately, not on the list. Cheers, Tim Delaney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
Zero Piraeus schreef: : Not sure exactly how to put this ... I'm a mostly passive subscriber to this list - my posts here over the years could probably be counted without having to take my socks off - so perhaps I have no right to comment, but I've noticed a marked increase in aggressive language here lately, so I'm putting my head above the parapet to say that I don't appreciate it. Same here. I've been lurking here for a number of years, and I've always regarded this list as an example of friendly civilized behavior, quite exceptional on the Internet. I also have the impression that situation is changing for the worse, and it worries me too. -- "Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F Kennedy r...@roelschroeven.net -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Zero Piraeus wrote: > I'm a mostly passive subscriber to this list - my posts here over the > years could probably be counted without having to take my socks off - > so perhaps I have no right to comment, but I've noticed a marked > increase in aggressive language here lately, so I'm putting my head > above the parapet to say that I don't appreciate it. Thanks for speaking up, Zero. I agree that the aggressive language lately has been a bit of a problem; but it's not incurable, and Dwight Hutto seems to have recovered a more affable stance in his more recent posts. (Thank you, Dwight/David.) Etienne, we shall not trouble you for a demonstration of what you think *real* aggressive behaviour is. Really, you've already given us far more than the five-minute argument we paid for; though I suppose you could be arguing on your own time. But I'm sure if you go to the next room, you'll find "being dropped into the killfille lessons". Better, better, but "Plonk". Hold your username here... Wait, is that the wrong Python for this list? Oops. So confusing. ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On 13 October 2012 16:21, Zero Piraeus wrote: > : > > Not sure exactly how to put this ... > > I'm a mostly passive subscriber to this list - my posts here over the > years could probably be counted without having to take my socks off - > so perhaps I have no right to comment, but I've noticed a marked > increase in aggressive language here lately, so I'm putting my head > above the parapet to say that I don't appreciate it. > > Robust disagreement is one thing [and can be quite enjoyable for those > of us merely spectating], but there's really no need to go around > calling people idiots at the drop of a hat. Quite apart from anything > else, when the contributor you're calling names is as helpful and > knowledgeable a member of the community as some of those targeted have > been, it makes you look a bit daft. > > And, yes, I know bringing it up could be construed as stoking the > flames ... but, well, "silence = acquiescence" and all that. > I was going to passively agree to this, but Etienne's obvious trolling impulsed me to state that I do. I can't say I'm free from blame, but I feel we have had a bit more name calling and internet-punching than usual, but I also have a trust in this list in that whenever it's gotten bad before we've always calmed down. Plus, aside from 8*, we have a lot of brains on this list, so we really shouldn't be calling *anyone* "idiots". * Then again, 8 is pretty bright for a bot. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Aggressive language on python-list
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 11:21:28 -0400 Zero Piraeus wrote: > : > > Not sure exactly how to put this ... > > I'm a mostly passive subscriber to this list - my posts here over the > years could probably be counted without having to take my socks off - > so perhaps I have no right to comment, but I've noticed a marked > increase in aggressive language here lately, so I'm putting my head > above the parapet to say that I don't appreciate it. > > Robust disagreement is one thing [and can be quite enjoyable for those > of us merely spectating], but there's really no need to go around > calling people idiots at the drop of a hat. Quite apart from anything > else, when the contributor you're calling names is as helpful and > knowledgeable a member of the community as some of those targeted have > been, it makes you look a bit daft. > > And, yes, I know bringing it up could be construed as stoking the > flames ... but, well, "silence = acquiescence" and all that. > > -[]z. > -- > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list OT. you obviously has no clue what agressive behavior mean. :-) So please continue with the passive tone saying nothing relevant and login to facebook. -- Etienne Robillard Green Tea Hackers Club Fine Software Carpentry For The Rest Of Us! http://gthc.org/ e...@gthcfoundation.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
