Re: Proposal: GR to deal with effects of a personal dispute
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 11:50:48AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> There is a lamentable personal dispute between Sven Luther and some
> other developers. There have been some attempts at reconciliation and
> various offers, but none have succeeded in ending this dispute.
>
> Two recent significant actions have been:
> (a) Suspension of Sven Luther as a debian developer for 1 year
> Message-ID: <87y7li1bys.fsf@vorlon.ganneff.de>
> (b) Suspension of Sven Luther from debian-project
> Message-ID: <20070529224705.GF3977@murphy.debian.org>
>
> While (a) did not end the dispute, (b) has brought some peace to
> debian-project, although some continued to discuss the issue.
Notice that i don't accept full responsability for the suspension, and
that a really fair handling of this would have also mentioned all those
others who provided argument-less FUD mails. It takes two to wage a
flamewar.
> I do not expect this proposal to end the dispute either because it
> doesn't give everyone everything they want, but I hope that it will
> move things on, bring more peace to debian development and allow
> debian to be more fun for more people. As ever, if things change, we
> can change this plan later.
>
> - ---- START OF PROPOSAL ----
>
> We resolve that:-
>
> 1. Sven Luther is suspended from all debian lists for a year, which
> should be similar to (b), because the project generally liked his
> two-month self-suspension and wishes not to receive his discussion
> contributions at the moment.
The main point you are missing, that if you remove the suspension, and
debian claims something about the fault of the previous events to be
shared (which nobody disputes they are), then the list behaviour become
no more a problem than for other DDs waging random flamewars.
It would be much more easier to simply say :
2. The Debian project resolves that this issue be declared a thing of
the past, and whoever brings it up again will face (insert random
penalties), eventually after a warning or so, because error is human,
and mistakes do happen.
> 2. However, Sven Luther should be allowed onto lists where Q posters
> request it, where Q is half of the square root of the number of
> posters last month.
>
> 3. Sven Luther is reinstated as a full developer, reversing (a),
> because the project wishes to receive his technical contributions.
>
> 4. Evading the suspension will be regarded as a second offence of
> header-forgery on lists.debian.org and should result in immediate
> expulsion, as in the Debian Machine Usage Policies.
Hey, this is not needed, i am a man of word, as i have shown with the 2
month ban, and this portrays me as an evil doer, which i reject.
You don't need this clause.
> 5. Discussion of Sven Luther is banned from all lists where he is
> suspended, because there is no right of reply.
Why not simply join all list related issues in a common : discussion
about this dispute is banned from all lists, and let it be at that ?
> 6. Acceptance or rejection of Sven Luther by projects, subprojects,
> IRC channels and any other forums is left to their maintainers,
> although we ask that they judge fairly.
They should not complain if they get forked if there is a refusal, nor
feel pissed if some other media is chosen, but i guess that is common
sense :)
MJ, l like this proposal, i think you are too heavy weight on the
unneeded technicalities. A much simpler and straightforward solution
would be :
===
1. Discussion about the problem <find a name being more neutral than
just me> is banned from all lists and irc channels. + some discussion
about penalties, with a first warning, and a more neutral wording.
2. Sven Luther is reinstated as a full developer, reversing (a),
because the project wishes to receive his technical contributions.
and then the paragraph about apologies.
===
Much more simpler, fair, and satisfactory. Also not making me a sub-DD
under a different law, while the fault is shared by more than just me.
Even if we used different means to handle the issue. One could compare
the relative gravity of an expulsion request with the two threads we had
these past days for example, ...
Thanks MJ for this,
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: