On Wed, 2019-01-09 at 19:20 -0500, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> On 1/9/19 5:39 PM, Josh Triplett wrote:
>
> > Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 10:47:05AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > > People seem to feel they're unreasonably put-upon by having to think
> > > > about
> > > >
Josh Triplett writes:
> If you have to have your "guard up" to avoid hurting people, you have a
> more fundamental problem.
> It really *isn't* that hard to just think about the effect of your words
> on others *all the time*. As Russ said, that's a fundamental skill.
Eh... I do think that
On 1/9/19 5:39 PM, Josh Triplett wrote:
Anthony Towns wrote:
On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 10:47:05AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
People seem to feel they're unreasonably put-upon by having to think about
what they're saying *at all*, but this is absurd. Everyone else in the
world is doing this all
Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 10:47:05AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > People seem to feel they're unreasonably put-upon by having to think about
> > what they're saying *at all*, but this is absurd. Everyone else in the
> > world is doing this all the time.
>
> There are times
Hi Ian
On Thu, 10 Jan 2019, 02:03 Ian Jackson Very regrettably, it may become necessary to produce a fuller list of
> incidents, including responses, to justify the recent DAM decision.
>
> Please search your communications archives. If you have had an
> adverse experience of any kind with
On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 09:40:24PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes ("Call for experiences of Norbert Preining"):
> > Very regrettably, [...]
>
> Several people whose opinions I hold in high regard have told me that
> this was a seriously bad idea. On an official level, I received
On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 05:03:14PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Very regrettably, it may become necessary to produce a fuller list of
> incidents, including responses, to justify the recent DAM decision.
>
> Please search your communications archives. If you have had an
> adverse experience of
Ian Jackson writes ("Call for experiences of Norbert Preining"):
> Very regrettably, [...]
Several people whose opinions I hold in high regard have told me that
this was a seriously bad idea. On an official level, I received a
complaint from listmaster.
So, I'm sorry. I failed to anticipate
On 15277 March 1977, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Thank you very much, Joerg (and DAM team) for coming up with this
proposal. I have just returned to work after a month off, and my brain
isn't yet 100% wired to be productive again (WAY off 100%, I'd say),
but this really looks like a good (although
On 15277 March 1977, Ian Jackson wrote:
Very regrettably, it may become necessary to produce a fuller list of
incidents, including responses, to justify the recent DAM decision.
Please search your communications archives. If you have had an
adverse experience of any kind with Norbert Preining,
On 2019-01-09 17:03 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Please search your communications archives. If you have had an
> adverse experience of any kind with Norbert Preining, in public or in
> private, please email me.
What about if we have only had positive experience/communications? Can
we not submit
Joerg Jaspert dijo [Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 11:27:35PM +0100]:
> Hello everyone,
>
> One of the things that emerged from the recent discussions around DAM
> actions is that we are missing a way to review or appeal DAM's decision.
> Currently the only way to do this is running a full-featured GR,
On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 07:28:34PM +0100, Luke Faraone wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 at 19:07, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > Le 9 janvier 2019 16:49:30 GMT+01:00, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> > >I would try to use software that can run a vote like that,
> > >where it's possible to provide proof that
On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 at 19:07, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Le 9 janvier 2019 16:49:30 GMT+01:00, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> >I would try to use software that can run a vote like that,
> >where it's possible to provide proof that your vote was recorded
> >properly. I think there is such open source
Outsider here. Conflict around Norbert's mode of discourse and Ian's
mode of responding to it has clearly been an ongoing problem for
Debian for over five years: https://lwn.net/Articles/575390/ What
tools for resolving this exist now that didn't exist then? If the
answer is "nothing much",
Le 9 janvier 2019 16:49:30 GMT+01:00, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
>On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 04:28:41PM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>>
>> Would this vote be secret? In some situation, I'd rather not vote
>than
>> having my vote disclosed. I'm very much OK for the secretary to see
>what
>> I voted for
Thomas Lange - 09.01.19, 18:17:
> > This reminded me about
> > https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2018/12/msg00025.html
>
> For easier understanding, this is the post from Daniel with subject:
>
> "€ 500 cash bounty for information / Debian privacy breaches"
Thanks for looking it up.
I do
> This reminded me about
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2018/12/msg00025.html
For easier understanding, this is the post from Daniel with subject:
"€ 500 cash bounty for information / Debian privacy breaches"
--
regards Thomas
On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 05:03:14PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Very regrettably, it may become necessary to produce a fuller list of
> incidents, including responses, to justify the recent DAM decision.
Sorry, but such things should be collected before a decision, not after.
"Please help us
Very regrettably, it may become necessary to produce a fuller list of
incidents, including responses, to justify the recent DAM decision.
Please search your communications archives. If you have had an
adverse experience of any kind with Norbert Preining, in public or in
private, please email me.
On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 04:28:41PM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
> Would this vote be secret? In some situation, I'd rather not vote than
> having my vote disclosed. I'm very much OK for the secretary to see what
> I voted for though.
The voting would be secret. I think the only output should
On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 04:28:41PM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 1/7/19 11:27 PM, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > 5. NM-Committee vote
> >
> > After 7 days discussion, or earlier if unanimously agreed by the NMC,
> > NM-Frontdesk will ask the secretary to conduct a secret,
On 1/7/19 11:27 PM, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> 5. NM-Committee vote
>
> After 7 days discussion, or earlier if unanimously agreed by the NMC,
> NM-Frontdesk will ask the secretary to conduct a secret, 3-day-long
> vote, with the following options:
>
> 1. Uphold the decision of
Joerg Jaspert writes ("Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions"):
> On 15276 March 1977, Karsten Merker wrote:
> > Therefore the clause "If more than half of the NMC (excluding DAM) abstain
> > or do not vote, the decision is not overturned" would IMHO need to be
> > removed completely from the
Hello,
Anthony Towns:
> On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 11:27:35PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>> 1. Appealing DAM decisions
>> --
>> Any person who had their Debian membership suspended or revoked by DAM may
>> appeal the decision.
>
> Based on the process you describe, I'd
25 matches
Mail list logo
