On Sat, Aug 21, 2004 at 12:15:34AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: > On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 11:04:42AM -0700, Carla Schroder wrote: > > There is no such thing as a rational dialog with > > people of this ilk, because their goal is not to engage in any kind of > > constructive communication. It's all about disruption, pointless arguing, and > > attention-getting at any cost. > > You're going to have a *really* hard time finding people in Debian who > fit that description. I can think of a couple. (No, Andrew, you're not one of them, nor any of the other typical high-profile candidates for attack, like Branden, elmo, Ryan, and so on). Just so we're clear on that. > > Don't you think it's unfair to the people who are helpful, and > > useful, and who really contribute to the project, to force them to put up > > with that lot? > > Anybody who has any trouble dealing with the sort of thing you > describe, is *far* too unstable to be allowed anywhere near package > maintainance, or anything else involving users. Hmm, that's an interesting thought. How will someone who doesn't like MJ Ray's missives going to react after the first bug-bombing? We can't (don't, whatever) control our developers to that level, let alone all the people who might want to report bugs. And yes, there are several inveterate reporters (along with many occasional "contributors") whose inputs don't necessarily stack up in the politeness stakes. - Matt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature