On Jan 8, 2016 2:27 AM, "Paul M. Jones" <pmjone...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:25, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jan 8, 2016 2:21 AM, "Paul M. Jones" <pmjone...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:15, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Jan 8, 2016 1:58 AM, "Paul M. Jones" <pmjone...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> I notice you did not answer my question. I'll ask again: when you say "proven guilty" what exactly do you mean? > > > > > > > > I see you are going to nitpick here. So let clarify it. > > > > > > When we're talking about banning people as a result of their actions, we'd better be clear on the details, don't you think? > > > > > > > > > > If there is a clear set of evidences that someone harassed, insulted, attacked another person then it fits this definition. > > > > > > What to you would be "a clear set of evidences"? (If you have examples of actual occurrences, that would be better than building hypotheticals, and probably easier.) > > > > > > > > > > Please keep in mind than harassment, attacks or insults have nothing to do with opinions. > > > > > > Unfortunately, too many people confuse "argument" with "harassment", and "disagreement" with "attacks", and "observations" as "insults." So I'd like to hear first what "clear evidence" means to you. > > > > This is what I mean by nitpicking. I am sure you perfectly understand my point as well as what I would consider as bad. Just in case, an opiniated hot discussion is not. I would appreciate a clear answer as well from your side and little less nitpicking. > > To give clear answers, I need clear statements. For example, if a person *claims* harassment, what to you would be *evidence* of that harassment? This is not nitpicking; this is defining the terms of the conversation. If you are unable to clarify, that's cool, just say so.
I think you are playing. That's cool too. I only have no time nor motivation to play that game. I think I made my opinion and view on this topic clear. You can't say that you would be ok to keep a person in the project in such cases, fine. Not surprising but fine.
