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

Re: why Ian Jackson won't discuss the "disputes" document draft with me

On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 12:01:52PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 11:38:39AM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 02:03:04PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > Maybe a GR really is the best way to go; we may find out that we can't
> > > even muster quorum on the issue, and that Ian, Manoj, and I have all
> > > inflated notions of the importance of this issue.  Maybe most developers
> > > are willing to put up with the flamewars we have.
> > 
> > I think it's an exercise in futility, does that count?
> > 
> > It's a game that fails if any of the players don't play fair, or take
> > things personally.
> To what are you referring?  Debian flamewars in general, or Ian's draft?
> (Or both? :) )

I was thinking about the notion of such a document, but I guess it
does apply to both.

Flamewars are pretty much inevitable within a group like Debian; I
don't see this helping matters any. People who take things personally
are not going to behave in a rational manner, and some people just
aren't rational; Debian has an ample supply of both. People who are
acting rationally can sort things out on their own, without needing

  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
 `. `'                          | Imperial College,
   `-             -><-          | London, UK

Attachment: pgpvDisxIMhMI.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: