Re: Asking for Calm
Aron Xu - 01.01.20, 12:22:49 CET:
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 7:09 PM Martin Steigerwald
<martin@lichtvoll.de> wrote:
> > Dear Sam.
> >
> > Sam Hartman - 31.12.19, 15:37:09 CET:
> > > folks, emotions are very high at the moment. It would really help
> > > if
> > > you could let the discussion die down. If there are issues that
> > > you
> > > need to address, please reach out to da-manager, the listmaster,
> > > DPL,
> > > the community team, or anyone else who you think will hear you and
> > > give you the help you're looking for.
> >
> > […]
> >
> > > We want to hear people even when they are very upset. Similarly,
> > > we
> > > don't want people to be provoked into being so upset that they
> > > cannot
> > > be heard.
> >
> > How does that go together, Sam?
> >
> > > I'm hoping that we can all cooperate to take a step back, and get
> > > the
> > > space we'll need to approach these issues in a sustainable manner
> > > and
> > > build the community we want to live in.
> > >
> > > Again, if you're hurting now and something needs attention, reach
> > > out, but preferably not on the list.
> >
> > Why not?
> >
> > How is going to say "I feel hurt about the outcome of the GR" –
> > personally I am not even sure whether I do – or "I think the GR did
> > not serve the highest good of Debian" or something like that which
> > is *respectful* and within the bounds of Code of Conduct, suddenly
> > not acceptable anymore?
>
> I don't hold an opinion on which direction to go at least for now, but
> I see a lot of mentions to Code of Conduct. Personally it doesn't
> look like a good phenomenon that CoC is being mentioned all the way
> down the path because it defines the bottom line of behavior which
> could be referred when dealing with extreme cases.
I mentioned it as one of the officially available guide lines. The mailing
list netiquette is another.
> Our community is always driven by consensus reached with polite
> communications, even if some appeared to be hot debates. Having a CoC
> is a good progress on the establishment of community procedures and
> documents, but to the best of my knowledge it is not intented to be a
> single point of failure that it makes up an impression of anyone is
> encouraged to do anything that is "not prohibited by CoC".
I included "respectful" as a word for a reason. I also mentioned
"harmlessness" and "mutuality" in other posts. So what I like to see and
hold up my own behavior with goes beyond the CoC. On the other hand I do
not intend to write down a huge and long list of – in my point of view –
acceptable or not acceptable behavior into every mail I write.
In no way I meant that anything goes as long it somehow abides to the
CoC. So please do not put anything like that into my mouth.
Thank you.
Best,
--
Martin
Reply to: