Greg Hogan <[email protected]> writes: > On Sat, Aug 1, 2026 at 1:28 AM bjc <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Greg Hogan <[email protected]> writes: >> >> > "pulling a gabber" >> >> this is abuse. > > No, but I did not expect to see the same pleading to delegitimize the > vote on consecutive GCDs. The common thread must just be coincidence.
this is a clear example of ad hominem, and if levity was attempted, so too was hurt. this is a violation of the kind communications guidelines and the code of conduct, specifically “Trolling, insulting or derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks.” imagine being in their shoes and seeing someone say this about you. it is *hurtful*. > And if Gabriel has received the tiniest bit of "abuse" after his last > minute disapproval on GCD 008 it pales in comparison to the invectives > he hurled out after his do-nothing GCD 007, for which he has never > offered even the tiniest insincere apology. two wrongs don't make a right. even if everything you say is 100% true, no one has the right to treat people like this. > But here we have again in your deeply unserious response a critique of > a bit of levity rather than the substance of the discussion. i'm serious as a heart attack. i have watched a community i had a deep respect for turn into a mob because someone exercised the right they were granted by that very same community. i am not defending gabber's actions. i *am* defending gabber's human dignity. i *am* defending the spirit of the project itself, as i see it. treating everyone with dignity and respect was, i thought, a fundamental principle here, and more than any other thing, that has made me excited about this community. we certainly talked the talk, but it seems like we're unable to walk the walk. it is more important to disagree respectfully than it is to agree vociferously. as for what to do? i have previously said, and the subsequent time has made clear: we need a process for parting ways with someone when we feel trust has been violated that severely. -bjc
