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

Re: Renewed appeal to the technical committee about the FransAndCo.Vs.Sven dispute

On 11/24/06, Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
First, what is the issue exactly. I am totally at a loss to understand what it
is exactly what is reproached me, and feel that i am unfairly handled.

I'm going to try to tackle this:

In simplest form, [and limiting the context to Debian] the issue is "listening".

Of course, that's somewhat inaccurate.  First off, we don't listen to email,
we read it.  And, it's very apparent that Sven does spend considerable
time reading emails.

However there is reading and catching points here and there, and there
is reading and understanding the viewpoints and concerns of the person
who wrote them.

And, to some degree, no one really understands ALL that's being written in
the debian forums.  No one has that kind of time.  So we necessarily live
with some failures to comprehend.

But that doesn't mean that such failures are a good thing, it's just being
realistic that they exist.  We just try and avoid those failures boiling
into a significant issue in areas that are important to us.

Anyways, back to Sven... Sven: as a prolific writer in these forums, you
have exposed yourself to far greater levels of misunderstanding than just
about anyone else.  In part, no one has the time to even digest the
volumes you've written and understand why you wrote them.  In part, you do
not allow yourself the time to digest what other people are saying.  In part,
your interjections detract from the time people have available to study what
other people have to say.

And I think that, in a nutshell, is the issue.  It's really only a serious issue
because it's not a temporary state of affairs, but something that continues
for years.

And... repetition can be a fine technique to get a point across, but getting
points doesn't happen if you're not understanding other people.  You
won't know when they understand you just fine, you won't recognize
when they have a pertinent point to contribute, and you certainly won't
recognize when they don't understand you.

Anyways, if you're looking for someone to point at one specific thing
you've said, one specific issue, you're not going to get that.  There's
plenty of problems which have been raised, and not resolved, but taking
any of those in isolation is an excellent way of missing the fundamental
issue.  Taken in isolation, pretty much everything you've said is at least
tolerable and at times helpful.  That said, you do not allow people to take
your statements in isolation.

And I think all people are asking from you is...  more time (by a couple
orders, maybe, over what you currently grant) and a willingness to back off
when needed.  Time on your part to digest what they are saying, and for you
to grant them the time and respect to understand the good points in what you
have to say.  And if you can't grant that, what's the point?

That said, by this point many people seem to be rather unhappy (Sven
included), and that winds up being another issue in and of itself.

Finally, this is my point of view as a relatively disinterested observer.  I've
probably overlooked a number of pointed comments which would incline
a person to disagree with my assessment.  That kind of conflict is almost
inevitable with this kind of problem.


Reply to: