Re: abandoning the rules of discourse
Kai Henningsen wrote:
>
> fpolacco@icenet.fi (Fabrizio Polacco) wrote on 23.10.97:
>
> > Disrespectful language and obscentity disqualify only those that use
> > them. Ignoring them is the right thing to do, IMO.
>
> IMO, it depends entirely on the situation.
Yes, it's true and I agree.
I suppose I should have written "the use of Disrespectful language and
obscentity with the aim of diminish the others ... disqualify only those
that use them."
> I don't think you can capture this in a simple rule.
>
In fact that's why I say that we should not rule this (in a "don't"
list).
> > * Don't insult other people. Discussion should focus on technical
> > issues, not people.
I would put this in positive:
* Insults move the focus of the discussion from the technical issue
to other issues (like anatomy) that are not so interesting to
people on this list.
> >
> > * Don't insult other people's proposals. If you have to resort to
> > insults, it makes your technical critique less effective and
> > discourages constructive participation.
> > Try assuming that the
> > other person simply has a different valid perspective or hasn't
> > had some experience which might change their mind.
* Insult other people's proposals makes your technical critique less
effective and discourages constructive participation. Try assuming
that the other person simply has a different valid perspective or
hasn't had some experience which might change their mind.
> > * Be courteous. Try assuming the best of other list participants
> > and try to minimize the risk of hurting other people's feelings
> > when creating messages.
> >
> > If you feel someone is violating these guidelines to an extent
> > that is disruptive to the WG, you may use the traditional
> > technique of "shunning."
> > A mailing list participant is shunned by:
> > (1) Assuming other list participants did not read posts by the
> > offender
> > (2) Never responding directly to posts by the offender
> > (3) Never quoting text from posts by the offender
> > (4) For extreme cases, you may privately encourage other list
> > participants to shun the offender.
> > The purpose of shunning is to minimize disruption to the WG
> > without creating new administrative procedures or restricting
> > list participation.
> >
> > Shunning is a voluntary grassroots action.
> > The WG chair will not make a public post to this list encouraging
> > shunning of a specific individual.
> > The WG Chair will not deliberately ignore appropriate WG procedure
> > questions raised by any list participant.
> >
I like this set of rules.
They don't impose anything while giving an effective way to isolate the
intruder.
Fabrizio
--
| fpolacco@icenet.fi fpolacco@debian.org fpolacco@pluto.linux.it
| Pluto Leader - Debian Developer & Happy Debian 1.3.1 User - vi-holic
| 6F7267F5 fingerprint 57 16 C4 ED C9 86 40 7B 1A 69 A1 66 EC FB D2 5E
> Just because Red Hat do it doesn't mean it's a good idea. [Ian J.]
Reply to: