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

Re: Disputes document - metaflameage

>>"Ian" == Ian Jackson <ian@davenant.greenend.org.uk> writes:

 Ian> So, without following up to anything in particular, I'd just like to
 Ian> say that I'm quite frustrated by what's been going on here.  Branden
 Ian> and Manoj have been telling us at length how high-handed and
 Ian> undemocratic and otherwise evil I am, when in fact all I've done so
 Ian> far is post a document for review and comment, and defend it against
 Ian> some criticisms.

	An coopt a bunch of people to lend weight to the draft without
 their knowledge. And, to me at least, appear to ignore constructive
 criticism by dismissing it as something you disagreed with. 

	The frustration has not been one sided.

 Ian> Branden and Manoj can complain until they're blue in the face that
 Ian> obviously I'm being arrogant and cabalish and what have you by
 Ian> disagreeing with them on some points, and declining to change my
 Ian> working draft (and even, in Branden's case, declining to deal with any
 Ian> more of his dysfunctional flameage).  Shock horror, I even admit to
 Ian> being swayed by private email !  But, it's not their decision.  It's
 Ian> currently my draft, and I'll put what I like in it.

	That is precisely the attitude that raises my
 hackles. Contributors can complain until they are blue in the face,
 but it is your draft, and it shall be put together as you want it.

	Do I really need to say any more? 

 Ian> So, Manoj and Branden - and anyone else: if you are serious about your
 Ian> disagreements about the _content_ of this document, rather than just
 Ian> wanting to play politics about how it gets written, would you please
 Ian> try to participate in a constructive way ?

	I did. And I had my contributions dismissed. I would rather
 the stewardship of this document was handed to someone with less of a
 problem with including peoples contributions.

 Ian> If you disagree totally with my tone, for example, you could write
 Ian> your own version and we could see which one got more support, or try
 Ian> to find compromises.  If you disagree with individual points, then we
 Ian> should try to argue them out, and if we can't agree then eventually
 Ian> someone will end up voting.

	Voting is a piss poor way of deciding on most issues. And,
 unfortunately, my timetable does not lend itself to yours, this is a
 particularly bad time for me be working on something which is
 potentiallyu critically important. 

 Ian> If noone comments substantively on my next draft, which I'm about to
 Ian> put together and post, then I'll assume that there's nothing much that
 Ian> can be done to improve it, and I'll just go back to the tech ctte and
 Ian> see if they want to vote in favour of it.

	Wonderful. Then a document that should come from the community,
 about ettiquette, is handed on to them from on high.

	Great conflict resolution, BTW.

 Yow!  Is my fallout shelter termite proof?
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: