Re: Craig Sanders
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 01:29:04AM +0100, Jan Martin Mathiassen wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I want to apologise to Thomas Bushnell, BSG, for the rudeness of my fellow
> > Debian developers. I don't think that strong language is doing anything
> > to carry forward and argument. At best it can be ignored, at worst it is
> > harmful for the social integrity of the group and counter productive to
> > our goal.
> >
> > I am ashamed that this is the current level of our communication.
>
> "strong language" differs from person to person.
I accept your correction. What I meant is a mixture of offensive
language (something that can happen by bad luck as well, across language
borders) and offensive in tone and intent.
I think it is partly the responsibility of the sender to watch out for
the limits of the receiver to what offensive really is, and the
responsibility of the receiver to point out in a friendly manner if he feels
that this limit is crossed.
> there's a reason thomas gets shot at. he most likely gets MORE flak than he
> deserves, but he set himself up for it by publicly posting about a personal
> issue between him and craig. so if thomas is clever, he'll learn to re-read
> the mails he gets a few times, write up something, read through that a few
> times, think things through for 5 minutes or more, re-read both mails again,
> check for new posts in the thread (if any), and THEN maybe sending it off.
> he'll look like less of a <insert appropriate word here> that way.
I don't know if Thomas did this or not. I want to point out though that you
are requesting much more from Thomas than you do from Craig (who said that
he didn't follow a procedure like you describe above), and that means you
are judging them with different measures. This is the first thing I don't
understand.
> i'm not saying craig wasn't rude (he was, definitely... but he was also
> right), i'm just saying thomas took it one step further (sans the language,
> of course).
I agree that posting a private reply to a public post in such cases is not a
polite thing to do. I haven't made my mind up if it was justified
nevertheless in this particular case, as I'd prefer if the mails in question
had never been written in the first place[1]. As we all know which four
letter words Craigs knows, and what flames Craig can write if he wants to,
the mail was pretty much useless as an information to most of us.
Still, I am quite surprised that you are so angry about Thomas' bounces.
If the mails Craig wrote are perfectly normal and not necessarily insulting
to you, why care? This is the second thing I don't understand.
Thanks,
Marcus
[1] That's a complicate sentence for me. I hope I got it as correct as to
make it possible for a native speaker to parse it correctly.
--
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org brinkmd@debian.org
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org marcus@gnu.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de
Reply to: