Re: ARMHF - Mediaplayer software?
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 5:00 AM, Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> wrote:
> I'd encourage you to read the mailing lists code of conduct,
> especially the second and third last items and the item on CCs. In
> addition, you might like to read the Debian Community Guidelines for
> some tips on constructive communication.
well... i have another idea. there's actually two failures here, i
believe you'll agree once i outline them. the first is that i
responded in a manner which, if anyone is familiar with my
limitations, people will know that it is commonly misunderstood, taken
the wrong way, etc. etc. i often find that i cannot clearly get
concepts across, this results in substitution of expletives as a means
to express the strength of feeling *behind* the concept, etc. etc.
the second is this: there may be people in the debian community
*better suited* to tackle these thorny issues.... *but none of them
did*.
so when i responded, although i identified the issues, the responses
left people saying "i wouldn't have tackled it that way because that
makes us all look bad" but the point is they *didn't* tackle it.
so my suggestion is, therefore, that we - collaboratively - work on a
suitable response that *is* suitable. from this, several things would
be achieved:
a) i'll learn by example and by doing so effing well learn to
communicate effectively
b) the people who felt like they were being shat on won't feel that way
c) the people who perhaps should have been paying closer attention
will know to do so in future and have a template to work from should
something similar arise.
d) we get to resolve and clarify something that's bugging a lot of people [*1]
thoughts anyone?
l.
[*1] there's quite a few people who don't like the situation wrt
software freedom that the rbpi brings up: they just don't talk about
it publicly because they might get shouted down as haters-of-education
or something ridiculous by those people who don't understand the
importance or implications of software freedom.
Reply to: