In my mind, "moving a conversation to sage-flame" is a constructive, if imperfect way to handle conversations that are going off the deep end. It's a way that we can flag a conversation as being inappropriate for the tone of sage-devel without pointing fingers. If somebody doesn't want to continue, they can just stop participating at that point. Badgering such a person, either through repeated posts to sage-flame or through personal email, would be inappropriate.
For example: I'm happy to lob personal attacks at Richard Fateman on sage-flame and have him respond in kind. This is an established tradition that we both enjoy, and as far as I can tell, neither of us has ever had our feelings hurt there. The origin of sage-flame was a recognition that certain thick-skinned developers enjoy this peculiar conversation style, and the fact that other developers are entertained by the conversations. Those of us who do participate in the flames recognize one another. Looking back in time, I see that I (privately) requested that Richard not be so brutal with another developer whose thread had been moved to sage-flame, and he obliged (and as far as I know, that developer didn't get their feelings hurt). Generally, one should expect responses in kind on sage-flame, so for the most part, it doesn't get nasty except between people who are having a good time of it. So, the above is good for 'no-fault' offenses where all parties are simply being bullheaded about something and mutually pissing each other off. But I do see a distinct need for finger-pointing in some cases. If William goes Torvalds on some brand new developer, I don't care where the communication occurs, that's simply inappropriate and must be addressed. If he found a bug in FLINT and gave Bill Hart the same treatment, I'd go make popcorn. In situations where it looks like real abuse has occurred, a committee of arbiters should exist to rule on it. Otherwise, we're left with mob rule and the onlooker effect (where nobody speaks up to stop abuse, assuming somebody else will take care of it). On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Viviane Pons <vivianep...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I have been following this for a while even if I didn't post. I am actually > in favor of a code of conduct even so I understand its limitations. > > Anyway, what I think we really need is "something to do" when you feel > insulted or offended in a thread. Something to take into account is that > this usually takes place in tiresome, time consuming conversations and the > "offended" person has usually very limited energy left. A bad scenario is if > this person just stops talking for a while and a worst one is when this > person just stops getting involved in sage-devel (or sage) altogether. This > is what we want to avoid. > > Is moving to sage-flame enough? It seems ok but the fact that we're not > actually "moving" the conversation might be a problem. Also the vote process > that William proposed seemed quite heavy to me because it might lead to more > debates and, as I said, the offended persons could already be on the edge of > stopping the talking altogether. > Some other questions: is posting on sage-flame a good enough reason to be > allowed to insult people? (I don't feel it should be) What do we do if it's > not a thread that's going out of line but comments on sage-tracks? > > I feel a code of conduct could just be a good shared base of "good attitude" > to follow... Something to help you say to someone "this is a personal > attack, you're being out of line" with a feeling that you're supported by > the community doing so. I don't mind if we don't call it "code", "common > sense recommendations" would be enough for me. > > Cheers > > Viviane > > 2014-11-19 22:43 GMT+01:00 Viviane Pons <vivianep...@gmail.com>: >> >> >> >> 2014-11-19 20:56 GMT+01:00 Mike Zabrocki <mike.zabro...@gmail.com>: >>> >>> A bunch of 10~20 guys who can talk together for days about having or >>>> >>>> not a "code of conduct", each expressing his own voice and mixing it >>>> with the others'... really have no communication problem :-P >>>> >>> Am I misreading this or does this belong on sage-sexist-comments ? >>> >> >> I honestly don't think it was... >> >> >>> >>> -Mike >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "sage-devel" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>> email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-devel" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
