On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Mukund Sivaraman m...@banu.com wrote:
Hi Stormy
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 09:36:41AM -0700, Stormy Peters wrote:
We are talking about GNOME hosted platforms. Planet GNOME,
blogs.gnome.organd the GNOME mailing lists are all forums we host and
I think we can
Hi,
Lionel Dricot wrote:
Do you think that many people were turned out of the GNOME community
because of an hostile experience? I don't think so. (I might be wrong, I
just never met anybody that has a bad experience).
Some names of good contributors who have drifted away from GNOME, at
least
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.orgwrote:
I (fully) agree with John here.
The lawyer-talk proposal of Jason is a no for me personally.
It's also not the document that I've put my name under when I signed the
Code of Conduct any longer if that amendment is
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 12:13 -0600, Jason D. Clinton wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org
wrote:
I (fully) agree with John here.
The lawyer-talk proposal of Jason is a no for me personally.
It's also not the
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:15 PM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.orgwrote:
I don't like the entire intention of enforcement.
The intention is improving our community quality. The method is what you
disagree with. What alternative method would you propose?
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote:
Hi,
Lionel Dricot wrote:
Do you think that many people were turned out of the GNOME community
because of an hostile experience? I don't think so. (I might be wrong, I
just never met anybody that has a bad experience).
Le mercredi 25 nov. 2009 à 10:35:46 (-0700), Stormy Peters a écrit:
When bad behaviour happens we talk about it a lot but nothing happens.
I respectfully disagree. There have been cases on our lists where people
did act like Dicks, in ebassi's words, and they have been frankly and openly
said
Hi,
Dodji Seketeli wrote:
Moreover if you informally compare the tone of the discussions on our forum,
I am
not sure it's any worse than, say on the linux kernel mailing list. But
at least on the lkml, if you misbehave, you are likely to feel the pressure
quite directly. Are you sure they
I'm trying to stay out of the discussion at least today. But:
On 11/25/2009 12:49 PM, Dave Neary wrote:
Hi,
Lionel Dricot wrote:
Do you think that many people were turned out of the GNOME community
because of an hostile experience? I don't think so. (I might be wrong, I
just never met
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org wrote:
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 12:13 -0600, Jason D. Clinton wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org
wrote:
I (fully) agree with John here.
The lawyer-talk proposal of Jason
Le mercredi 25 nov. 2009 à 19:39:13 (+0100), Dave Neary a écrit:
Hi,
Dodji Seketeli wrote:
Moreover if you informally compare the tone of the discussions on our
forum, I am
not sure it's any worse than, say on the linux kernel mailing list. But
at least on the lkml, if you misbehave,
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 10:35:46AM -0700, Stormy Peters wrote:
When bad behaviour happens we talk about it a lot but nothing happens. As
Dave says, people (good contributors in many cases) just leave.
I know of this first hand in Dave's own case, where he left the GIMP
project due to issues
On 11/25/2009 01:50 PM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
Alternative proposal: lets deal with the problem at hand and get our
story straight about what is planet.gnome.org, what can be posted
there (i.e. no porn and vulgar language etc.) and how we can help
to enforce a reasonably exact policy on an
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Behdad Esfahbod beh...@behdad.org wrote:
To make the discussion more practical, lets take one real incident of the
past: Murray's blog re Jeff. It did not include vulgar language. It did
include exaggerations that turned into libel. Now how does any
On 11/25/2009 02:18 PM, Jason D. Clinton wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Behdad Esfahbod beh...@behdad.org
mailto:beh...@behdad.org wrote:
To make the discussion more practical, lets take one real incident
of the past: Murray's blog re Jeff. It did not include vulgar
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Behdad Esfahbod beh...@behdad.org wrote:
On 11/25/2009 02:18 PM, Jason D. Clinton wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Behdad Esfahbod beh...@behdad.org
mailto:beh...@behdad.org wrote:
To make the discussion more practical, lets take one real incident
Hi Dave,
I thought that those members evolved naturally. Life is changing, so are
interests and priorities. I was a proud Ubuntu member myself before
coming to GNOME. Not because of the Ubuntu community (au contraire) but
because my interests have changed.
It has to be added that, sometimes,
Hi Lucas,
On Wed 25 Nov 2009 13:48, Lucas Rocha luc...@gnome.org writes:
In the context of GNOME Foundation, it's really hard to argue about
how we expect our members to behave if there is no official guidelines
that members are supposed to comply with. The GNOME Code of Conduct[1]
has been
On 11/25/2009 05:13 PM, Andy Wingo wrote:
It's only IRC and DDL that are really the outliers, it seems, and there
there is enough social pressure, combined with ignore/kill lists, that I
don't really see all the fuss.
And foundation list? Just saying each maintainer should solve this on their
On 11/25/2009 02:33 PM, Jason D. Clinton wrote:
I understand your point but I do think it would have made Jeff feel a
little better, even if it were someone else that referred the event to
the MC.
In any case, I think we are straying slight from what we actually want:
to prevent such attacks
1. People speak on their own behalf, not on behalf of GNOME. Unless they
ARE talking on behalf of GNOME (say, board, release team, etc),
On things like the planet that can be addressed by suitable tags and
styling (as could inappropriate content - if there is a 'rant filter'
option or
Hi Behdad,
On Wed 25 Nov 2009 23:19, Behdad Esfahbod beh...@behdad.org writes:
On 11/25/2009 05:13 PM, Andy Wingo wrote:
It's only IRC and DDL that are really the outliers, it seems, and there
there is enough social pressure, combined with ignore/kill lists, that I
don't really see all the
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Behdad Esfahbod beh...@behdad.org wrote:
I also like to see two more ideas added to CoC:
- Learn to agree to disagree.
- Criticize ideas, not people presenting them.
Back to the Murray case, with my recommendation, everything would have
happened the way
On 11/25/2009 05:57 PM, Jason D. Clinton wrote:
Well, I withdraw my proposed amendment to the CoC as there has been no
support for it and I'm not entirely happy with it as written, either.
But, while I agree that the above would be welcome additions to the CoC,
I don't think this helps us
101 - 124 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
