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

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)



Mr. Folkert has a grudge against me from another forum in which a rather
flagrently explosive fest of fabrication of history and rules, failure
to stand by prior statements, gross personal abuse, spinelessness in
standing up for justice (with few exceptions), and violation of personal
confidences, all of little interest beyond those immediately involved,
occured.

Mr. Folkert being among those who are aparently still seeking to engage
in this dispute, and as I've ceased participating among a group whose
integrity and respect quotient is rapidly accelerating past zero with a
negative velocity, he's elected to drag the battle to both the #debian
IRC support channel, and now this mailing list.



on Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 12:03:03AM -0500, Greg Folkert (greg@gregfolkert.net) wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 23:50, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > on Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 04:49:14AM +0000, ben (ben_foley@web.de) wrote:

> > > while some of us may have got carried away on the exuberance of our
> > > collective velocity, where colin requested that the thread be closed, i
> > > think that there were only one or two respondents who failed to respect
> > > that request. karsten's manner, on the other hand, comes across as an
> > > order, 
> > 
> > I'd individually contacted most (all I could find) participants of the
> > thread, after it had persisted for several days.  Most of these either
> > didn't respond (but ceased posting to the thread) or replied
> > apologetically.
> 
> Yes, oh dear moderator.

No such claim on my part.  Just an involved listmember who sticks up for
principles on occasion.


> > Several disputed the basis of my request.  Which is:
> > 
> >   - List charter:  "Help and discussion among users of Debian".
> >   - Code of conduct:  ""
> 
> As you wish, as you are never wrong.

No such claim on my part.  Quite the contrary:  I admit my mistakes,
invite correction, and apologize where appropriate.



> > Several of the individuals who chose to dispute (at length) my request
> > with me made specific reference to anarchist principles.
> 
> Hmmm... interesting you would take exception to this.

Merely noting that the anarchists were specifically exempting themselves
from stated rules and principles.  If you'd care to review the
discussion you're welcome to poll them for it.

My point remains:  decisions to flagrantly violate rules and reason
isn't without its costs.  Which, come to think, is something you might
have a passing aquaintance with yourself.



> > I'd recommend you speak of what you know.  In this case, you are beyond
> > your depth.
> 
> There are places, I am sure, you are out of your depth.

Absolutely, and generally admitted in advance.  Your point, Greg?



> > > and indeed no less of an indulgence than participation in the thread
> > > itself. furthermore, the threat of "consequences" strikes me as a tad
> > > too authoritarian for this particular list. 
> > 
> > Consequences are simply a matter of mutual respect.  If you show respect
> > of others on the list by following posted and general Netiquette
> > guidelines, you'll find your postings receive a reading, and possibly, a
> > response.
> 
> That is the Pot calling the Kettle Day-Glo Orange.
> 
> Or maybe a flamage fest.

If you're referring to the incident mentioned in my preface to this
post, you'll find that my own response reflects my comments here.  In
the absence of mutual respect, I withdrew from participation in the
group.  The difference being that in that case it was group leadership
exhibiting utter lack of character.  In this, it's a few misbehaving
subscribers.



> > If you choose to abuse the list and its subscribers, you'll find that
> > people chose to ignore your postings, either on a case-by-case basis, or
> > by technical means, including killfiles.  I also specifically forwarded
> > at least one message to a Debian project member as the individual more
> > or less explicitly begged to be removed from the list, and I was unable
> > to fulfill the reqeust.
> 
> I am sure you know first hand by the sound of it.
> 
> > As several individual failed to show respect to the list, and
> > specifically showed a studied lack of respect to either myself, Colin
> > Watson, or both, I felt that the favor of a reply or reading was no
> > longer warranted.
> 
> My pot is Blue and Kettle Chrome... please advise.

If you're going to plagiarise Mr. Moffitt, please credit him
appropriately.



As my response to you on the #debian channel indicated:  I have no
interest in dragging any personal dispute out onto public channels.  If
you have specific complaints against me, you know how to reach me by
email.  Any other displays on your part merely emphasize your own lack
of maturity, and personal itegrity.

Duly noted.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com>        http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
  The revolution will not be televised.
  You can apt-get it from the usual mirrors, however.     http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: pgp1nPlYMExAi.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: