> On Jan 11, 2016, at 2:48 AM, Stanislav Malyshev <smalys...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > So, we have a situation where we have a mismatch between a problem and a > solution, and that is what the misunderstanding is based on. You and > several other people try to prove something we already agree about - > that certain problems exist - and forget to prove something that needs > to be proven - that what you propose would solve *these* problems in any > acceptable way. Instead, the solution (at least part of it) is designed > to solve *different* problems, which nobody showed we even had. This > mismatch is an issue. This is my chief concern with the proposal. We keep seeing allusions to problems of toxicity and tone and the like all the while being assured that the proposal does not seek to dictate behavior or punish people for defending their position passionately. If the latter is true, what’s the use in making a case that certain people and/or communication channels aren’t friendly enough? Kevin Smith Hearsay Interactive <http://gohearsay.com/>
