On Thursday, April 11, 2013 23:49:18, Filipus Klutiero wrote: > Hi Chris, > > > On Saturday, April 06, 2013 19:55:08, Filipus Klutiero wrote: > > > Hi Chris, > > > thanks for being faithful to our project and bringing up this topic > > > :-S > > > > > > Chris Knadle wrote: > > > > From the point of view of the bug reporter, the message the DD > > > > has sent > > > > > > > > (whether intended or not) is "I'm not even going to dignify this > > > > with a response. *click* " It's not /only/ this rudeness that's > > > > the problem, though; the bug reporter has now been handed a puzzle > > > > of "convice the expert", where the expert needed to be convicned > > > > seemingly isn't willing to spend any effort in communicating, but > > > > the bug reporter does. This kind of thing therefore promotes > > > > either conflict or the bug reporter walking away in disgust, > > > > /either/ result of which is detrimental. I thus personally > > > > consider this to be the first step into "the path of the Dark > > > > Side". > > > > > > > > If we could come up with a reasonable way of handling this > > > > particular problem, it would be greatly appreciated. Do you think > > > > emailing owner@bugs.d.o is a good way of dealing with this? > > > > > > It's not a /good/ way in absolute terms, but it's pretty much the only > > > way for now, so I guess it's currently the best way (see > > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2011/11/msg00030.html ). > > > > Uh... I don't understand. The above suggestions avoiding private email > > aliases; I'm not sure I understand where this fits the "rudeness issues" > > I've had in the BTS -- the bug reports where it happened are public. > > > > Maybe you can give me a better idea what you're trying to refer to. ;-) > > I'm not sure I understand what you're not sure to understand... but I'll > try to rephrase. > > You were asking whether contacting ow...@bugs.debian.org is a good way > of dealing with ITS abuse. Officially, reporting such abuse currently > has to be done that way. As there is a single way, it's (relatively) as > much a good way of dealing with problems as a bad way. > > In absolute terms, contacting ow...@bugs.debian.org is not a good way of > dealing with any problem, as ow...@bugs.debian.org is - as indicated in > https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2011/11/msg00030.html - a > private email alias, with little chance of solving the issue. If that > doesn't work, you can escalate the issue to project leadership as a last > resort... but you'll also hit a private email alias there.
Emailing anyone privately leads down the path of "privatization". [I've already been down this road.] As such I think it might be better to publicly CC leadership, to invite public comment rather than private conversation, because private conversation cannot address the public problem. What I really want in this "game" is a "penalty flag: unnecessary roughness" called by the referee so that there can be a /measured response/ to the problem. Right now Debian doesn't seem to have penalty flags or even a referee, and instead the roughness has to be bad enough that the linesmen step in and eject the player for all time. This is unacceptable. > I entirely agree that the solution should be public, but that doesn't > mean there will be a public solution. Having any solution would already > be more than I expect. That's exactly why we're openly discussing it. -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201304121146.01065.chris.kna...@coredump.us
