Re: Asking DPL to shorten Discussion Period for rms-open-letter
>>>>> "Milan" == Milan Kupcevic <milan@debian.org> writes:
Milan> An official Debian statement is not about any particular
Milan> individual but about Debian's interests and goals.
Yeah, but in general, I find persuading people to change their minds on
stuff like this to be a waste of list time.
If someone is interested in a particular question in order to decide how
to vote, I find that to be a compelling argument in many cases to
continue discussion.
If there is no one who is likely to change their vote, and if the
positions are well understood, I'm going to do what I can to encourage
less email traffic on the issue. By saying that I cared about one
question and not another, I was doing several things:
1) Letting Jonas know where his energy in discussing further might be
valuable at least as directed to me.
2) Letting everyone know that I was thinking about whether adding more
messages was helpful.
3) Trying to discourage people from arguing the legal question with me
because I'm not open to persuasion on that point. If there is someone
else who considers that question live, engage with them.
Don't waste your or the list's time engaging with me on a question where
I've already made up my mind.
I won't stand in the way of you discussing that issue with someone who
is either trying to decide how they feel or who is trying to understand
the issue.
Milan> There is no space for emotional revenge punches in
Milan> the name of Debian.
I agree with the above but don't believe the authors of the letter see
it as an emotional revenge punch.
I don't see it that way either.
I'm still considering whether
1) Making an unnecessary accusation is inherently shaming
2) Whether this letter is something I'd consider an attempt at shaming
(something I reject) or an attempt at public accountability (something I
often embrace)
3) Whether the accusation is unnecessary.
I appreciate that other people may view the situation differently, and
am in no way trying to imply that my view is the one that should drive
the conversation. I do think it's reasonable to consider my view when
you're trying to decide whether interacting with me is worth your and
the list's energy though. At this point in the process, I also do think
it's valuable to have a specific audience in mind when you write a
message and to think about whether your audience will find the message
useful.
--Sam
Reply to: