Daniel Pocock <dan...@pocock.pro> writes: > and I reply with the strongest possible evidence, personal experience > and scientific research.
You decided to distort a political issue that many of us feel strongly about to attack a policy around what to republish in project-owned forums, which is only on a continuum with that issue if you look for it with a telescope. You did this in a way designed to provoke strong feelings and create moral absolutes rather than start a conversation, and you did this knowing full well that you were attacking a specific team inside Debian composed, like all Debian teams, of overworked volunteer members. You did this without the slightest attempt to extend an assumption of good will or allow for the possibility there are further things going on that you don't know about, and you did so with such pathetically sloppy and incomplete research that even *I* know you are leaving out substantial background, and I haven't been trying to follow this saga. In other words, you immediately turned the temperature up as high as you could go and called on other people to attack your fellow Debian developers on the grounds that their work is a violation of UN-recognized human rights (!!). That you cannot understand how completely absurd this is means that it is futile to try to argue this point with you on the merits. There *is* an underlying project debate here that is a real debate, namely the rules for participation and republication in project forums. I think it's a debate we've had to the point of absurdity, but I'm not horribly surprised that people want to still have it, and if that had been all your message had been, I would have sit on my hands and not added to the noise. But you saw an opportunity to artificially strengthen your debate stance by comparing the Debian anti-harassment team to assassins (!!) and you seem completely oblivious to why this is utterly unacceptable in collective discussion within a project of colleagues, peers, and friends. I have no idea personally what set off Norbert's removal from Planet Debian. When I said irrespective of the merits of your argument, I really meant that. But *this* bothers me far more: this kind of brutal approach to Debian politics is hostile, nasty, and deeply hurtful to the project. If you want to have a debate about the decision of a team in Debian, you have an obligation to the project to conduct that debate with a certain basic level of mutual respect. Asking you to not compare your fellow project members to assassins does not seem like a high bar! If you aren't going to do that, I for one am quite happy to make this argument about *your* behavior, which was appalling and utterly toxic to supporting the community of a volunteer collective project. > Having been rear ended by a utility van, thrown off a motorbike half way > across a roundabout and having also received abusive and threatening > messages from people within the Debian community, I feel that the > physical pain caused by the latter was more than the former. Those > people should be ashamed of themselves. Yeah, no shit. Your lack of awareness that *you* are that person who should be ashamed of yourself because that's what *you* just did is honestly mind-blowing. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
