Hi Don,
Don Armstrong wrote:
On Sun, 14 Apr 2013, Chris Knadle wrote:
> On Saturday, April 13, 2013 13:34:23, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Sat, 13 Apr 2013, Chris Knadle wrote:
[...]
> > Why should there be consequences that you can see?
>
> A man you work with is treating you badly [...]
Sune Vuorela wrote:
On 2013-04-06, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> It's not a /good/ way in absolute terms, but it's pretty much the only
> way for now, so I guess it's currently the best way (see
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2011/11/msg00030.html ).
My experience with contacting own
Hi Russ,
Russ Allbery wrote:
Chris Knadle writes:
> On Thursday, April 11, 2013 23:49:18, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
>> In absolute terms, contacting ow...@bugs.debian.org is not a good way
>> of dealing with any problem, as ow...@bugs.debian.org is - as indicated
>> inhttps://lists.debian.or
On Monday, April 15, 2013 20:44:21, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > On Saturday, April 13, 2013 13:34:23, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > On Sat, 13 Apr 2013, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > > > Are you saying that if someone communicates abusively in the BTS
> > > > publicly
Don Armstrong writes:
>> I'm /not/ asking to know who got a "penalty flag" (I don't need to
>> know) -- but I and others /do/ have a need to know if those exist
>> and what they are. The only reason I've been looking at past events
>> was to /infer/ what penalties exist due to a lack of informatio
On Sun, 14 Apr 2013, Chris Knadle wrote:
> On Saturday, April 13, 2013 13:34:23, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Sat, 13 Apr 2013, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > > Are you saying that if someone communicates abusively in the BTS
> > > publicly, they _shouldn't_ be publicly confronted about that at all?
> >
>
On Saturday, April 13, 2013 14:42:57, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Chris Knadle writes:
> > On Friday, April 12, 2013 13:52:42, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> Chris Knadle writes:
> >>> Emailing anyone privately leads down the path of "privatization".
> >>> [I've already been down this road.] As such I think
Russ Allbery writes ("Re: Dealing with ITS abuse"):
> Most of the sanctions Debian can take are various forms of temporary or
> permanent revocation of privileges. When it comes to abusive discussion
> in public places, suspending someone's ability to use that place of
&g
On Saturday, April 13, 2013 13:34:23, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > Are you saying that if someone communicates abusively in the BTS
> > publicly, they _shouldn't_ be publicly confronted about that at all?
>
> The goal of any communication from owner@ regardin
Chris Knadle writes:
> On Friday, April 12, 2013 13:52:42, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Chris Knadle writes:
>>> Emailing anyone privately leads down the path of "privatization".
>>> [I've already been down this road.] As such I think it might be
>>> better to publicly CC leadership, to invite public
On Sat, 13 Apr 2013, Chris Knadle wrote:
> Are you saying that if someone communicates abusively in the BTS
> publicly, they _shouldn't_ be publicly confronted about that at all?
The goal of any communication from owner@ regarding abuse isn't
confrontation, but correction and resumption of communi
On Friday, April 12, 2013 13:52:42, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Chris Knadle writes:
> > On Thursday, April 11, 2013 23:49:18, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> >> In absolute terms, contacting ow...@bugs.debian.org is not a good way
> >> of dealing with any problem, as ow...@bugs.debian.org is - as indicated
>
On 2013-04-06, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> It's not a /good/ way in absolute terms, but it's pretty much the only
> way for now, so I guess it's currently the best way (see
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2011/11/msg00030.html ).
My experience with contacting owner@bugs, listmaster, wik
On Fri, 12 Apr 2013, Russ Allbery wrote:
> However, Debian doesn't have a habit (for all the psychological
> reasons I mention above) of creating a public wall of shame to
> record places where people have been given a "penalty flag."
I've personally been remiss in my goal of creating a Debian BTS
Chris Knadle writes:
> On Thursday, April 11, 2013 23:49:18, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
>> In absolute terms, contacting ow...@bugs.debian.org is not a good way
>> of dealing with any problem, as ow...@bugs.debian.org is - as indicated
>> in https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2011/11/msg00030.h
see
> > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2011/11/msg00030.html ).
> >
> > Uh... I don't understand. The above suggestions avoiding private email
> > aliases; I'm not sure I understand where this fits the "rudeness issues"
> > I'
.. I don't understand. The above suggestions avoiding private email
aliases; I'm not sure I understand where this fits the "rudeness issues" I've
had in the BTS -- the bug reports where it happened are public.
Maybe you can give me a better idea what you're trying to refe
On Saturday, April 06, 2013 19:55:08, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> Hi Chris,
> thanks for being faithful to our project and bringing up this topic :-S
>
> Chris Knadle wrote:
> > From the point of view of the bug reporter, the message the DD has sent
> > (whether intended or not) is "I'm not even go
Hi Chris,
thanks for being faithful to our project and bringing up this topic :-S
Chris Knadle wrote:
From the point of view of the bug reporter, the message the DD has sent
(whether intended or not) is "I'm not even going to dignify this with a
response. *click* " It's not /only/ this rudene
19 matches
Mail list logo
