Anthony Towns <aj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> As far as I can see you have expressed an opinion on the topic, namely
> that you disagree with Debian banning Linus from Debian events because
> of his behaviour in fora outside of Debian's control.
> Is that not accurate?
Well, I don't believe anyone proposed doing that. (That isn't, for
instance, what Ian was saying at the start of this whole thing.) But,
regardless, you are correct: I'm not in favor of banning Linus from Debian
events.
> I generalised that in three ways to get from your statement to mine:
And that's the problem.
Generalizing about this stuff is rather dubious. To generalize, you
usually have to simplify, and I don't think this is an area of discussion
that takes to simplification all that well. That's really been a large
problem with this whole discussion, including some of my ill-conceived
ways of phrasing my position earlier. Many of us, myself included, have
been trying to simplify to be clearer, or are trying to understand other
people's perspectives by simplifying and generalizing, and I think that
was probably a mistake from the start.
> * "Linus" became "folks"
> * "banning from Debian events" became "sanction/punish"
> * "Linus's behaviour" became "beaviour, no matter how wrong-headed"
> Are you able to correct one/some of those generalisations to a
> principle that you do endorse?
No.
Anyway, for the rest, we're off into definitional issues again, and I
think pretty irrelevant ones. My point was just that I don't consider
being temporarily banned from a mailing list to be any big deal, and for
me it doesn't rise to the level of punishment or what I consider the
connotation of sanction. (The word makes me think of trade sanctions or
formal condemntation, not traffic tickets, even if the strict dictionary
definition includes the latter.) I suppose it is a punishment if one
thinks of it that way, but I'd encourage people not to think of it that
way, and instead think of it more as an opportunity to take a breath and
refocus.
Anyway, it's certainly possible to think of it as a punishment, and that's
fine, but my point is still that our primary means for living up to our
code of conduct shouldn't be to do negative things to each other. Rather,
it should be to aspire to being the project and the sort of people,
collectively, who naturally behave with courtesy and (argh, definitions
again, but I'll say it anyway) respect for each other. We may have to
apply some filtering to get there, but that's certainly not the *point*.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@xxxxxxxxxx) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
Please respect the privacy of this mailing list. Some posts may be declassified
3 years after posting as per http://www.debian.org/vote/2005/vote_002
Archive: file://master.debian.org/~debian/archive/debian-private/
To UNSUBSCRIBE, use the web form at <http://db.debian.org/>.
|
|
