+1 On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Sam Hartman <hartm...@debian.org> wrote:
> >>>>> "Russ" == Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> writes: > > Russ> Martin Steigerwald <mar...@lichtvoll.de> writes: > >> Russ Allbery - 28.10.17, 16:13: > > >>> There wasn't *anything* "left out" of that discussion. > > >> In my opinion this is a pretty bold statement. > > >> If everyone has been heard, noticed, felt and valued, if > >> everything has been covered, then why are we discussing it… yet > >> again now? > > Russ> Those are not equivalent statements. In that sort of > Russ> discussion, it is literally impossible to make everyone feel > Russ> valued, since at least some people on each side will only feel > Russ> valued if their preferred option is chosen. That's therefore > Russ> not a reasonable thing to attempt to achieve; we can try to > Russ> maximize the number of people who feel valued, but there are > Russ> usually at least some people involved in this large and > Russ> sprawling of a decision for whom "valued" is synonymous with > Russ> "agreed with." > > For myself, I've found that if I work with people I can often get to a > point where they feel valued even when there is disagreement. > As you point out that's not true for some people and it is difficult > even when it is possible. > > I was not planning on discussing systemd again. > > I am discussing how we handle conflict because I hope we can do a better > job of helping people feel valued even when we do not agree with their > technical positions. > In the limit, I hope to do your literally impossible:-) > > Fortunately, I'd be thrilled and filled with joy to simply get closer to > that limit. Helping create a culture where we have mechanisms to help > ourselves separate value from agreement, and where we value using those > mechanisms would delight me. > I think even that is a hard ask, but I do not think it is literally > impossible. > > --Sam > >
