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

Re: Fwd: Re: [OT] Re: Defending yourself

Dne, 12. 05. 2011 12:21:49 je Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. napisal(a):

In <[🔎] pan.2011.05.12.09.59.42@gmail.com>, Camaleón wrote:
>On Wed, 11 May 2011 23:24:30 -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> On 2011-05-11 17:35:20 Freeman wrote:
>>>On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 08:30:49PM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
>>>> IMHO, that rule lacks the following preface: "Should a user states 
>>>> his/ her desire to keep a private conversation..."
>>>
>>>+1
>>>
>> -1
>>
>>>Unless the user states that it is a private email, or it is obviously 
>>>discrete, the most expeditious thing is to forward it to the list.
>>>
>> It's nearly impossible to infer whether the sender meant the message to 
>> be private or not.
>
>No, it is not.
>
>I am writing to a public mailing list and I expect that any reply to any 
>of what I wrote on it is kept the same -public- and directed to the
>mailing list.
>
>So as I am not the one breaking the way a mailing list works, if I
>receive an e-mail _just directed to me_ (and not to the list) following a >thread that is taking place in a public mailing list I can proceed as I 
>prefer.

You can choose to break the Code of Conduct, yes.
However, the Code of Conduct is the expected behavior on the list. If you are sent a message via private mail, the Code of Conduct says that you should not 
quote it (in full or in part) in mails to the list, without explicit
permission.

>> Making the reply public and cause significant and
>> irreversible damage.  Whereas, keeping the reply private causes, at
>> most, temporary and reversible damage.
>
>Should the user wants to go private, he/she has to clearly state so in >the message. If he/she does not, that's not my fault and I don't have a 
>crystal ball to guess each user preferences on this matter.
This is seems to contradict your earlier statement (above) that it is not "nearly impossible to infer" the senders intent, by implying one would need a 
functional crystal ball in order to do so.
Since you don't have a crystal ball (i.e. find it nearly impossible to infer the senders intent), you should take the action that results in the least harm -- keep the reply private. Failing that, you should follow the established 
Code of Conduct for the list -- keep the reply private.
You can chose not to conduct yourself as expected for the list, but it would 
not be appreciated.
If you'd like to change the Code of Conduct to align with your desires, I think you should take the issue up with the list masters. I am willing to discuss the issue further, but I think you'll find convincing me that your behavior is in line with the Code of Conduct is an unlikely proposition. Even if I were to be convinced that your behavior should be sanctioned (or at least tolerated) by the Code of Conduct, I am not in a position to change it. 
--
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                   ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net                   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy         `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/                    \_/



+1

a) the Code of Conduct is perfecty clear on the point;
b) I fully agree with the principle of the-lesser-harm too; an important principle in interpersonal and public relations; c) the *fact* of going private is indication enough of the person's intention -- but even if we don't see it that way, we should respect the fact alone. Making assumptions as to their reasons for going private, or even going as far as to imply that they don't have a clue how this list (or their mail client) should be used -- and "chastising" them by posting back to the public list -- may come across as impolite at best and preposterously condescending at worst. If it *was* a blunder on their part, let them be the judge of that, OK? As you say, 


It is easy enough to
prompt the sender to use the list for future correspondence and simultaneously give you permissions for your private message to be quoted in a public forum. 

A perfectly sane *and polite* way to go.
That said, I must admit that up till now I've generally posted privately received messages back onto the list... I see that as a mistake now. I did it, at least in part, out of irritation because I saw it as a disrespect toward my signature which clearly states I don't want to be messaged privately. In line with the above, I apologize to anybody concerned for doing that in the past. That behavior is about to change. 

--
Cheerio,
Klistvud http://bufferoverflow.tiddlyspot.com Certifiable Loonix User #481801 Please reply to the list, not to me.
Reply to: