[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: This is getting ridiculous ...



On Friday 16 June 2006 15:33, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 11:24:34AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > There is *NO* technical reason which warrant his action, and the only
> > reason he does it is to humiliate and punish me.
>
> You're the only one here who thinks that's a punishment, 

He's not, furthermore everyday use of the english language clearly supports 
that vision:

Punishment \Pun"ish*ment\, n.
   1. The act of punishing.
      [1913 Webster]

   2. Any pain, suffering, or loss inflicted on a person because
      of a crime or offense.
      [1913 Webster]

            I never gave them condign punishment. --Shak.
      [1913 Webster]

            The rewards and punishments of another life.
                                                  --Locke.
      [1913 Webster]


Sven lossed his commit rights because because of his offences, I'd say that 
fits 2 above nicely, no?

> let alone "humiliating". 

that's subjective, clearly he experiences it as humiliating. that may or may 
not be how you would feel in his shoes (for whatever instatiation of you).

but dismissing his feelings out of hand is not exactly a good starting point 
for solving a social problem. The feelings on both sides simply are, the 
mediator refusing to acknowledge the feelings of one of the parties is 
_not_ helpfull. (and that's probably the basis for Sven saying that you 
weren't mediating) 

  NOTE: I sayd acknowledge the feelings, that does in know way mean you
        agree with them (from either side)

> If you would like to setup your own subversion 
> repository and humiliate or punish Frans by not giving him access to it,
> you're welcome to do so.

What purpose is being served by making Sven jumpt through hoops when making 
technical contributions to D-I? How does it help fix the social issues 
between Sven and Frans in any way? 

Net effect at this point seems to be:
- extra work for those playing middle man for Sven's commits and Sven
  himself
- bad feelings and frustration on Sven's part (neither of which is likely to
  help improve communications)
- lots of flames on the issue everywhere, and resulting frustration all
  around

None of which is positive.

Meanwhile I have seen Sven make an honest (though imperfect) effort to 
improve the way he communicates. Frankly at this point I don't see how 
refusing to give Sven back commit rights (which he never abused AFAIK) is 
helping anything.

Apperently you don't share this opinion, could you as mediator explain what 
gains you see in refusing Sven commit rights still? Cause standing here on 
the peanut gallery I'm not seeing any.
-- 
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)

Attachment: pgpCASoojY5yb.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: