Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

[MJ Ray <mjr@dsl.pipex.com>]

Erinn Clark <erinn@double-helix.org> wrote:
> * MJ Ray <mjr@dsl.pipex.com> [2005:03:10 10:33 +0000]:=20
> > Some of my suggestions have been accepted previously. Damned
> > if I can find the right bug tracker entries for them, though.
> Yeah, a bug tracker might be nice, but it seems a bit overboard [...]

I was pretty sure I put at least one suggestion through a bug
tracker. My memory is not brilliant. Others were almost all
off-list because of the atmosphere, so can't be shown in public
and that means some here wouldn't believe it. :-/

> > This is a lower priority than some other tasks (package review
> > and upload, for example) and I feel progress is impeded by some
> > irrational or uncommunicative people. For example, "Searching
> > for Safety Online" (which recommends "pro-active interventions")
> > has been used to justify the debate-killing silence policy in
> > the List FAQ, which seems just plain broken.
> IIRC, you recommended having someone designated as a sort of "troll
> detector" or similar who would decide that $PERSON wasn't worth responding
> too and announce it to the list. Luckily we haven't had to resort to any
> similar measures since last year. [...]

That's almost it, but there was also that the "detector" (I think
I meant "troll advisor" but I'm not sure whether I used that
name) should inform $PERSON off-list and advise them how they
could get a voice within the debian-women culture. Probably
a lot of the time that will be directing to FAQs or codes,
but there's always something not covered there. Using a
smaller number of people makes it easier to spot new conduct
FAQs without overwhelming the list while people acculturate(?).

I think you've not felt the need because debian-women hasn't
been communicating with the rest of the project as much as when
Amaya sent out that mailshot. Is this because debian-women learnt
from the response? Do you feel the group learnt the best thing?

> I don't consider ignoring people who seem to be out to shut down what we're
> working on "broken" though. You may be enlightened by what you call
> "debates", but many people (including myself) consider them draining,
> pointless arguments, which may explain some of our silence in this thread
> as well.

There are points to them, in both directions, although sometimes
the noise gets high here. Refusing to accept debate reinforces
my impression of debian-women as irrationally stubborn. I find
this quite amusing: my complaints to you seem similar to Sven's
complaints to debian-legal.

> Well, that is fine, but there are also some things you are unaware of as a
> result of your lack of time / interest.

Sure, so I thought it was idle. After a claim d-w is good at
communications, I asked questions about the stuff I last heard
happening and got flamed for that by Matthew Palmer in
<[🔎] 20050304005831.GA15091@hezmatt.org>. Maybe I shouldn't have
put my other stuff in the same mail, but we can cut mails.

> [...] I do not think that, due to their contributions, any of us would be
> opposed to having them on the website. [...]

Wow! That wasn't the impression I got last time I asked. If I
submit a patch to http://women.alioth.debian.org/involvement/
that reflects that, will you accept it? (Actually, how do I
make a patch for that?)

> How we function is pretty basic: negativity is uncalled for and we don't
> respond well to it, if at all. As time goes on we evolve to meet certain
> desires or needs as they arise. Requesting -- nay, demanding -- we evolve to
> meet your needs when you have not shown any vested interest in the group in
> any way, nor do you wish to contribute anything positive, is sure to be met
> with silence at best, hostility at worst. (I discourage the latter and I
> think we've improved in that area as well.)

I'm uninterested in the debian-women group and don't wish to
contribute anything which you consider positive yet because I
feel I basically disagree with you in the direction it's heading.
Equally, because I'm uninterested in the particular group,
I don't intend to harm it, but I will discourage acts which I
am interested in and think harmful.

I reiterate that the "silence" policy hinders you. I wish I
could find the right campaign note here, but my workspace is
a mess today. It suggests a short, polite, closed dismissal
works better than trying to ignore their view, which fits with
preserving "democratic possibility" or "political possibility"
as a way to avoid conflict. Do you know that idea too?

Silence beats getting the flamethrower out, but it's not best
practice.  A difficulty of words is that it's not as obvious
whether excitement is from fight or progress, especially when
we're not sharing a common culture. That isn't a good argument
for monoculture, in my opinion, nor for silence.

-- 
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Subscribed to this list. No need to Cc, thanks.