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

Re: Bits from the DPL (August 2019)

On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 02:32:10PM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 09:57:38AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > I'd say it is a consensus of those who prioritize participating in this
> > discussion enough to do so, consented to by the rest of the project.
> I'm sorry, but I disagree. Silence is not always consent.

I understand this is why we have multiple rounds of discussion with
summaries inbetween.

I personally do not see the length of discussions as much of an issue
for consent here. My main worry would be the level of potential
heat that I need to accept I have to deal with, if I choose to
participate in a discussion.

I notice that it takes me a significant amount of self esteem to send
mail to a debian list, and not everyday I have it. The thing is, if
people generally approve of what I write, the feedback I usually seem to
get is mostly silence. If someone, even just one person over many, has
an issue with it, then I get criticism.

If I say something that 1000 people like and one person hates, the
net visible effect in my inbox is probably one angry reply.

I think this could still work if the criticism were polite and
constructive. Some people in Debian disagree in a way that is pure
pleasure to read, as they bring new scope and possibilities to a

We however have frequent examples of feedback that can be very harsh[1],
or passive aggressive and not really constructive, and I need to accept
that if I post to a Debian list, I expose myself to that.

So, as long as long threads are summarised and the summary has a round
of review, I don't see a problem with mail or thread length in consensus

I rather see a challenge in building a discussion culture where people
actually feel good in participating, both in reading, and in writing
when they have something to ask or say.


[1] recent examples off the top of my head:
GPG key: 4096R/634F4BD1E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini <enrico@enricozini.org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: