I mean the time that is just over 12 hours from now...
- William Stein (cell phone)
On Nov 24, 2014 11:36 AM, "Nils Bruin" wrote:
> On Saturday, November 22, 2014 10:39:37 AM UTC-8, William wrote:
>>
>> I will start a new thread on sage-devel with a clear title "VOTE: code
>> of conduct", copy o
On Saturday, November 22, 2014 10:39:37 AM UTC-8, William wrote:
>
> I will start a new thread on sage-devel with a clear title "VOTE: code
> of conduct", copy of the proposed code, and [ ] Yes/ [ ] No option,
> and a time limit.
Good job going for the edge case on the time limit:-) Does your M
On 11/23/14 8:52 AM, John Cremona wrote:
> On 23 November 2014 at 11:26, Viviane Pons wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> You ask about the value of a non-enforced code. I think it's valuable
>>> to have something to point to, both for setting expectations for new
>>> contributors and a reminder for long-timers
On 23 November 2014 at 11:26, Viviane Pons wrote:
>
>
>>
>> You ask about the value of a non-enforced code. I think it's valuable
>> to have something to point to, both for setting expectations for new
>> contributors and a reminder for long-timers when things get heated. It
>> allows one to succi
> You ask about the value of a non-enforced code. I think it's valuable
> to have something to point to, both for setting expectations for new
> contributors and a reminder for long-timers when things get heated. It
> allows one to succinctly re-direct trolls rather than feed them. It
> gives furth
I think Robert makes a very important pint here which I would like to
highlight (as I must confess that I have stopped reading all of every
post in this thread...):
On 23 November 2014 at 06:59, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
>
> You ask about the value of a non-enforced code. I think it's valuable
> to
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave
Ltd) wrote:
>
> On 21 Nov 2014 22:22, "Dima Pasechnik" wrote:
>
>> I'd say it's OK to have such a code, but it's not really OK to actively
>> enforce
>> it. Such an active enforcement would only be counterproductive, if not
>> ou
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave
Ltd) wrote:
> Do you think a
> code of conduct would lead to any benefits due to "passive" means, and if so
> how?
I don't want to answer for him, but I still see a point here. Even
though there is no active enforcement, pointin
On 21 Nov 2014 22:22, "Dima Pasechnik" wrote:
> I'd say it's OK to have such a code, but it's not really OK to actively
enforce
> it. Such an active enforcement would only be counterproductive, if not
> outright impossible.
>
> Dima
Is there any point in having something that is not enforced? Th
On 22 Nov 2014 18:38, "William Stein" wrote:
> I will start a new thread on sage-devel with a clear title "VOTE: code
> of conduct", copy of the proposed code, and [ ] Yes/ [ ] No option,
I hope that your vote states how the code of conduct will be administered,
how readers of sage-abuse will be
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 4:17 AM, Simon King wrote:
> Hi Viviane,
>
> On 2014-11-22, Viviane Pons wrote:
>> Simon mentioned many times that "don't feed the troll" was the right thing
>> to do. In my opinion, it is not quite enough. Let's say you receive a
>> personal attack on a thread if you leav
Am Samstag, 22. November 2014 16:48:09 UTC+1 schrieb Nicolas M. Thiéry:
Conclusion:
>
[...]
Of course, nothing beats leading by example.
>
> Given that a formal Code of Conduct seems to make uncomfortable some
> developers for whom I have a strong respect, I am not anymore in favor
> of
A bit late for the vote but here is, for whatever it's worth, my
current perspective on the matter. The many interesting and
complementary view points that were expressed in this discussion were
quite influential; so thanks everybody for your participation!
Feel free to jump down to the conclusio
On Saturday, November 22, 2014 11:39:00 AM UTC+1, john_perry_usm wrote:
> I repeat that a code that isn't enforced is worse than no code at all.
>
I want to elaborate on this briefly, since people who have expressed the
contrary opinion deserve more than a bald assertion.
I'll explain by exampl
2014-11-21 23:48 GMT+01:00 Simon King :
>
>
> In some post in this thread it was claimed that another post was sexist,
> even though there was enough reason to refuse the claim. One person imputed
> bad intention to another person, without considering "in dubio pro". Such
> questionable, annoying
2014-11-22 11:39 GMT+01:00 john_perry_usm :
> On Friday, November 21, 2014 11:48:53 PM UTC+1, Simon King wrote:
>>
>> In some post in this thread it was claimed that another post was sexist,
>> even though there was enough reason to refuse the claim. One person imputed
>> bad intention to another
I'm curious: should the discussion here be considered a vote? A lot of
people may not be reading it for various reasons, thinking it's only a
discussion. Perhaps a vote would be more suitable in a thread titled,
"Please vote for or against a code of conduct."
I'm not objecting; I'm just curious
On Friday, November 21, 2014 11:48:53 PM UTC+1, Simon King wrote:
>
> In some post in this thread it was claimed that another post was sexist,
> even though there was enough reason to refuse the claim. One person imputed
> bad intention to another person, without considering "in dubio pro". Such
Hi Andrew,
Am Freitag, 21. November 2014 20:43:12 UTC+1 schrieb Andrew:
>
> I think your comments are a form of uber political correctness, in that
> you are taking the moral high ground that it is not politically correct to
> be political correct:) Although I agree that there are some merits to
> On sage-dev we're focused on sage, so mathematics and coding. Is is ever
> necessary, or useful, to talk about hating a particular person or a group
of
> people?
If what you have in mind is my "I hate the fact that [...]", you will find
that it hates . Not "this or that person". Don't act as if
On Thursday, November 20, 2014 6:06:53 PM UTC-8, William wrote:
>
> Can somebody help me count the votes? I made pass through this long
> and complicated thread, and here's what I seem to have got.
>
I'm -1 to an "enforcable" code of conduct. In extreme cases (which haven't
happened) a list ad
Hi Simon,
I think your comments are a form of uber political correctness, in that you
are taking the moral high ground that it is not politically correct to be
political correct:) Although I agree that there are some merits to this
perspective I think that this is just a distraction from the cu
> (1) Statements were made that were not factually correct.
> (2) People were directly insulted.
> (3) "Conversely, Sage is constantly evolving, and earlier decisions that were
> made in good faith may
> sometimes need to be reconsidered. Nonetheless, we should still appreciate
> the hard work do
> Which kind of rule would you see in a code of conduct that would make
> messages like those you cited (not all were pointing at you, by the way)
> illegal ?
(1) Statements were made that were not factually correct.
(2) People were directly insulted.
(3) "Conversely, Sage is constantly evolvin
I wasn't going to go there, but since it was brought up... ncohen knows
that in no way is this me griping about him personally; I remember some far
more vituperative problems from long ago that (thankfully) involve no-one
in this thread, to my recollection.
> Sorry Nathan, but since you asked,
I am not exactly a -1 for the code of conduct, but at some point between -1
and 0.
And of course, i wouldn't quit working on Sage and/or commenting here
regardless of the final decision about the code of conduct. My experience
in the Sage community has been very positive so far. Discussions ha
Hi y'all!
I have heard that this is a Texan greeting, so, I hope nobody feels
offended...
Am Freitag, 21. November 2014 08:36:40 UTC+1 schrieb Nathann Cohen:
>
> > Also, I can accept that using "he" as a general pronoun is not intended
> to
> > be sexist, especially from a non-nature speaker,
> Sorry Nathan, but since you asked, these comments clearly violate item (4)
> of the proposed code of conduct, and arguably items (1) and (2) as well.
Well, then I believe that my only defense is that I was feeling very
alone trying to get item 3 observed. Indeed, a bug had been returning
wrong a
On Friday, 21 November 2014 17:50:19 UTC+11, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> Which kind of rule would you see in a code of conduct that would make
> messages like those you cited (not all were pointing at you, by the way)
> illegal ?
>
Sorry Nathan, but since you asked, these comments clearly viola
Precisely.
Which kind of rule would you see in a code of conduct that would make
messages like those you cited (not all were pointing at you, by the way)
illegal ?
Additionally, I really do not believe that it qualifies as "people
insulting each other".
Nathann
P.S.: for those who never read th
> Hmmm... Well really I would be surprised if anybody can dig through
> sage-devel and find people insulting each other there.
"> Furthermore, I hate with all my heart that the same persons who come tell
> me that "they do not have sufficient time" suddenly find all the time they
> need to write
On Thursday, November 20, 2014 9:06:53 PM UTC-5, William wrote:
>
> Can somebody help me count the votes? I made pass through this long
> and complicated thread, and here's what I seem to have got:
>
> FOR a code of conduct, possibly suitably word-smithed (7):
>
> Jan Groenewald
> Travis Scr
Hello !!
> I've read the whole thread, and I have the impress that there are two
> distinct issues that are addressed. That's part of the reason people don't
> agree I think on the proposals. The first issue is to make sure that there
> are no public insults on sage-devel, trac, etc. by organizing
In the form it was presented at the very beginning I am strongly
against. This is completely infantilizing. That is a good idea to make
a vote, but please make it clear what the vote is about...
Vincent
2014-11-20 14:14 UTC−07:00, Bruno Grenet :
> Dear all,
>
> I've read the whole thread, and I h
Dear all,
I've read the whole thread, and I have the impress that there are two
distinct issues that are addressed. That's part of the reason people
don't agree I think on the proposals. The first issue is to make sure
that there are no public insults on sage-devel, trac, etc. by organizing
a
Can somebody help me count the votes? I made pass through this long
and complicated thread, and here's what I seem to have got:
FOR a code of conduct, possibly suitably word-smithed (7):
Jan Groenewald
Travis Scrimshaw
Anne Schilling
Mike Zabrocki
Andrew Mathas
Ben Salisbury
Viviane Pons
AGAIN
> Don't worry, native English speakers have no idea, either. I read the
> sage-sexist remark as a joke, but after Mike's followup, maybe not. In my
> experience, >95% of the
>
I was somewhat serious. The irony was that I really thought it was a
communication problem (either intentional or uni
Hello !
To Viviane:
> Well, except that a few people here said that they felt insulted in the
past
> and didn't know what to do about it. And some expressed the need of some
> kind of code of conduct...
Indeed, but I do not know if they will be more protected by a code of
conduct. Actual insults
On Thursday, November 20, 2014 5:06:43 AM UTC+1, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> The truth is that I have no idea how to say gender-neutral sentences
> in english without making my sentences non-deterministic, i.e. "a
> bunch of 20 [guys|girls] .* each expressing [his|her] own voice". And
> I hate non-
Well, except that a few people here said that they felt insulted in the
past and didn't know what to do about it. And some expressed the need of
some kind of code of conduct... William even said he knew some people had
left because of some bad behavior. So just saying "everthing is fine
because we
>> 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).
>
> My experience with sage li
Hello !
>> Am I misreading this or does this belong on sage-sexist-comments ?
>
> I wondered the same, but I would definitely given Nathann the benefit
> of the doubt, because:
Thank you for the benefit of the doubt. I can use some of that !
The truth is that I have no idea how to say gender-neu
> 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
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 continu
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 t
>> with the others'... really have no communication problem :-P
In that case, may I request a moment of silence to be held in honor of the
irony of this comment?
-Mike
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this gr
2014-11-19 20:56 GMT+01:00 Mike Zabrocki :
> 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 Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Mike Zabrocki wrote:
> 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
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 ?
-Mike
--
You rece
Just a random thought after coming back from a very nice evening out:
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
Good night to all ! One revi
I had always assumed that sage-flame was a fictional entity! Please
don't post a link here, I do not want to be tempted to read it
John
On 19 November 2014 16:30, mmarco wrote:
> I really like the idea of moving threads to sage-flame when they start to go
> out of hand. What was the criteri
On Nov 19, 2014 8:30 AM, "mmarco" wrote:
>
> I really like the idea of moving threads to sage-flame when they start to
go out of hand. What was the criterion to do so until now?
>
> Also, from an ownership point of view, the right to move discussions
between google groups belongs to google, and go
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 5:30 PM, mmarco wrote:
> Also, from an ownership point of view, the right to move discussions between
> google groups belongs to google, and google's rules state that they would do
> so when the person that opened the group decides (correct me if i am wrong).
> That would m
I really like the idea of moving threads to sage-flame when they start to
go out of hand. What was the criterion to do so until now?
Also, from an ownership point of view, the right to move discussions
between google groups belongs to google, and google's rules state that they
would do so when
On Nov 18, 2014 6:44 PM, "kcrisman" wrote:
>
> Commenting on a good point even though this is abandoned:
>
>>
>> > the top 12 all time list of contributors to Sage, in order, are:
>> >
>> > [a list of 12 dudes]
>> >
>>
>> In the event of a gender-polarizing conflict, this committee will not
>> be
Commenting on a good point even though this is abandoned:
> > the top 12 all time list of contributors to Sage, in order, are:
> >
> > [a list of 12 dudes]
> >
>
> In the event of a gender-polarizing conflict, this committee will not
> be seen as unbiased. In order to increase minority re
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Tom Boothby wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:36 AM, William Stein wrote:
>
>> Given the potentially political nature of such a choice, one
>> possibility is to do something apolitical, and select based on
>> ownership. In particular, based on lines of code cont
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:36 AM, William Stein wrote:
> Given the potentially political nature of such a choice, one
> possibility is to do something apolitical, and select based on
> ownership. In particular, based on lines of code contributed to Sage,
> which is an (imperfect!) but non-politic
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave
Ltd) wrote:
> but count me out.
As far as I can see, this idea is already abandoned anyway. Still, we
could do this list of by self nomination and see if this leads to
anything. We could call this the "community management team
On 18 Nov 2014 18:36, "William Stein" wrote:
> the top 12 all time list of contributors to Sage, in order, are:
>
> - William Stein
> - Mike Hansen
> - Volker Braun
> - Jereon Demeyer
> - Nathann Cohen
> - Robert Bradshaw
> - Robert Miller
> - Simon King
> - John Palmieri
> -
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Harald Schilly
wrote:
> This is the result for the last year
looking at the result again, I think it sorts by number of commits,
not lines. one could tweak the number of top authors (default is 20)
to get all of them in … so don't take this output seriously.
--
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Anne Schilling wrote:
> Not everybody who contributes through trac seems to have an account on github.
> So there are lots of contributors missing!
It would be fun to have somebody produce a proper list directly from
the git commit history.
However, I think Volk
On Tuesday, November 18, 2014 7:37:21 PM UTC+1, William wrote:
> Here is I think a concrete, apolitical proposal.
>
>
Calculating stakeholders by core contribution is certainly possible. My
only contribution would be, that this sage-abuse mailing list is read-only
for all others, not hidden a
On 11/18/14 11:07 AM, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:05 AM, Anne Schilling
> wrote:
>> On 11/18/14 10:36 AM, William Stein wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Anne Schilling
>>> wrote:
On 11/18/14 7:55 AM, Harald Schilly wrote:
>
> On Monday, November 17
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:05 AM, Anne Schilling wrote:
> On 11/18/14 10:36 AM, William Stein wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Anne Schilling
>> wrote:
>>> On 11/18/14 7:55 AM, Harald Schilly wrote:
On Monday, November 17, 2014 3:26:18 PM UTC+1, kcrisman wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Vincent Delecroix
<20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2014-11-18 11:36 UTC-07:00, William Stein :
>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Anne Schilling
>> wrote:
>>> On 11/18/14 7:55 AM, Harald Schilly wrote:
On Monday, November 17, 2014 3:26:18 PM UTC+1,
On 11/18/14 10:36 AM, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Anne Schilling
> wrote:
>> On 11/18/14 7:55 AM, Harald Schilly wrote:
>>>
>>> On Monday, November 17, 2014 3:26:18 PM UTC+1, kcrisman wrote:
>>>
>>> What if instead of a "code of conduct" there was a "community
>>
2014-11-18 11:36 UTC−07:00, William Stein :
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Anne Schilling
> wrote:
>> On 11/18/14 7:55 AM, Harald Schilly wrote:
>>>
>>> On Monday, November 17, 2014 3:26:18 PM UTC+1, kcrisman wrote:
>>>
>>> What if instead of a "code of conduct" there was a "community
>>>
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Anne Schilling wrote:
> On 11/18/14 7:55 AM, Harald Schilly wrote:
>>
>> On Monday, November 17, 2014 3:26:18 PM UTC+1, kcrisman wrote:
>>
>> What if instead of a "code of conduct" there was a "community
>> expectations" SHORT document that just say what we e
On 11/18/14 7:55 AM, Harald Schilly wrote:
>
> On Monday, November 17, 2014 3:26:18 PM UTC+1, kcrisman wrote:
>
> What if instead of a "code of conduct" there was a "community
> expectations" SHORT document that just say what we expect?
>
>
> I'm a little bit late to this thread, but I've
On Monday, November 17, 2014 3:26:18 PM UTC+1, kcrisman wrote:
>
> What if instead of a "code of conduct" there was a "community
> expectations" SHORT document that just say what we expect?
>
I'm a little bit late to this thread, but I've read all the mails. This
"expectations" document sounds
>
> >>1. Continuing to lose talented Sage developers specifically because
> >> they do not feel comfortable with the tone of the lists, and
> >
> >
> > Can you give an example of this, even if vaguely? I don't read every
> > conversation on the lists, but in my personal experience, the co
On Saturday, November 15, 2014 11:37:50 PM UTC+1, Anne Schilling wrote:
>
> On 11/15/14 11:47 AM, mmarco wrote:
> > I am afraid i would need more information to make a decission about
> this. I wasn't aware of the existence of the problems you mention. Without
> knowing what happened in those ca
It seems to me that there is newgroup etiquette that for this group should
include anyone requesting anyone else to move a discussion to private
mail, or to sage-flame. At least for a while.
Common courtesy would be to agree, even if
it might not be entirely to your liking.
Changing code is mo
Hello !
> Here are some links to discussions that look to me have gone astray.
Also, as you might notice
> that some of the participants in these discussions have since ceased to
post on the public
> mailing lists, even though they were active contributors/developers
before:
Ahahaha. Such a long
On 11/15/14 11:47 AM, mmarco wrote:
> I am afraid i would need more information to make a decission about this. I
> wasn't aware of the existence of the problems you mention. Without knowing
> what happened in those cases, i cannot say if the
> proposed code of conduct would have been a good idea
> +1 This is a HUGE problem and you're definitely not the first to complain
> to me about it.
Sorry, I'm not trying to complain about it, and I've read the motivation
for the change, and I understand it. I wouldn't want the people who
advocated it to infer some of us are ungrateful; this i
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 12:18 PM, john_perry_usm wrote:
> William
>
>> Understand, there are also consequences to not having some sort of
>> successful code of conduct. These include:
>>
>>1. Continuing to lose talented Sage developers specifically because
>> they do not feel comfortable wit
William
Understand, there are also consequences to not having some sort of
> successful code of conduct. These include:
>
>1. Continuing to lose talented Sage developers specifically because
> they do not feel comfortable with the tone of the lists, and
>
Can you give an example of this
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> Yo !
>
>> Understand, there are also consequences to not having some sort of
>> successful code of conduct. These include:
>
> Hmmm It is a bit incorrect to pretend that none of it would ever happen
> if we had a code of conduct. A cod
I am afraid i would need more information to make a decission about this. I
wasn't aware of the existence of the problems you mention. Without knowing
what happened in those cases, i cannot say if the proposed code of conduct
would have been a good idea to prevent them or not.
--
You received
Yo !
> Understand, there are also consequences to not having some sort of
> successful code of conduct. These include:
Hmmm It is a bit incorrect to pretend that none of it would ever happen
if we had a code of conduct. A code is just a tool to say that those who
wrote the code are a priori
Yo !
> Aaah you would have been a perfect German had you been born on the other
> side of the border ;-)
>
> Where is the threat of punishment in Kant's categorical imperative?
Ahahahah. I had never heard of that thing ! And love this way of
looking at things.
+1 to making Kant's categorical imp
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> -1 to a code of conduct, and +1 to considering that sage-devel is just yet
> another human community with no specfic rules needed.
>
> I was reading a law book on contracts recently, and it just feels wrong to
> have yet another example of a
84 matches
Mail list logo
