> -----Original Message----- > From: bishop.bett...@gmail.com [mailto:bishop.bett...@gmail.com] On > Behalf Of Bishop Bettini > Sent: Saturday, January 09, 2016 7:38 PM > To: Paul M. Jones <pmjone...@gmail.com> > Cc: Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com>; PHP internals > <internals@lists.php.net>; Stas Malyshev <smalys...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct > > On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Paul M. Jones <pmjone...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > On Jan 9, 2016, at 09:43, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jan 9, 2016 10:16 PM, "Paul M. Jones" <pmjone...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 8, 2016, at 23:25, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Paul's early reply in this thread were over aggressive > > > > > > > > You are wrong. At best, it is "your opinion" only. > > > > > > I am not wrong nor right. You were aggressive. And it is not only me > > saying. that if you check this thread. > > > > I've checked it and I don't see the "aggressive" you are talking about. > > Can you be more precise? Quoting my actual sentences would be good. > > > Within the framework of the alternative PHP Contributor Etiquette > <http://cerebriform.blogspot.com/2016/01/php-contributor- > etiquette.html>, a moderator would jump in about now. The email would go > something like this: > > --- BEGIN --- > > Hey Pierre and Paul, > > I hear what both you guys are saying. You're both making good points. I > think, though, how the words are presented is causing some > miscommunication. > > Pierre, when you say "Paul's reply [was] over aggressive", you're presenting > an opinion word as a logical truth. Instead, consider phrasing like "I felt > Paul's > reply was over aggressive". That phrasing signals you're expressing a valid, > true feeling you have rather than labeling the reply. > > Paul, when you say "You are wrong", you signal you've heard Pierre, but > reject his statement. As the statement is a valid and true feeling Pierre > presents, that is tantamount to rejecting Pierre as a person rather than > refuting his argument. Instead, consider phrasing like. "I'm hearing you say > my tone was aggressive. I mean to convey my passion, not attack anyone > personally." > > Pierre, consider that the word "aggressive" connotes unprovoked or militant > attacks: maybe "fiery" or "impassioned" might also fit. > > Paul, consider that "fascist" might be interpreted personally by those whose > families lived under fascist rule. Perhaps "authoritarian" or "imperious" > might > also fit. > > What do you think? Feel free to write back, or chat further on Skype or IRC > > --- END --- > > The idea is direct, straightforward mediation: listen, validate, guide, and > remain open.
You have my vote for the mediation team! Zeev
