X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=mVYeVphPLUk/XwAhSdf0Bowu/FiDYmHGFCwo3x13JHI=;
        b=JVWRHGGhHYbdAZe3q4CTJw4M3uxEMIm1xFjZaSiAf0RAhwdVE/CGIF6yJePnotwvrZ
         TtyCaacKLzDlzVjskIsVIWuXv1ruOL21RvgpZVeujKkgzKm0ykKi7X5MwuHWfRRgDcsH
         3qFAzd8YHZwBDb9cUSH/MUQQkrBP+g5eDdLHZd0zYWm7KVRQLMEUQW0abx+Wrb54BfWx
         b9lT8z4voHm+dyewLvMPiboFMbUdkZngeGMN0GehRo0M5g+uJhnYl5+q7aBokqxWGwN7
         jNISzycAJYA0G4fI5yPb397Vk8TbvhhZOPZnnwWXj2ob8Qxwcv62ZH50A/bDOxgj0fjM
         d8Dw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.93.168 with SMTP id cv8mr837998wib.54.1443819469763;
 Fri, 02 Oct 2015 13:57:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201510021858.t92IwflE019323@envy.delorie.com>
References: <0788cca443ca40a88d6e21f1a216a759 AT net2air DOT co>
	<560D81CE DOT 1010800 AT jump-ing DOT de>
	<201510012211 DOT t91MBXPI025587 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<560DB972 DOT 30203 AT jump-ing DOT de>
	<201510012306 DOT t91N6MXc027775 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<3705430D-86F7-45ED-AB09-4F9F737C8000 AT sbcglobal DOT net>
	<201510020536 DOT t925a5PK017417 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<20151002103552 DOT 26610 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se>
	<CAC4O8c87k5ag-OU2szW0p3mW7-5GS7hFAMpeUGUmF+QT=1mq5A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<201510021858 DOT t92IwflE019323 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 12:57:49 -0800
Message-ID: <CAC4O8c_LiAbr-99cfHypB0uxkmCYmEfMPZVd++6Oh6jqO5DZBw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Stop playing stupid political games with gEDA
From: "Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043c7fba9d7d5d0521256a7d
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

--f46d043c7fba9d7d5d0521256a7d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 10:58 AM, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:

>
> > +1.  John Doty has afterall pretty well demonstrated that his skin
> > is thick enough if you have something mean to say about him it can
> > go on a public list :)
>
> It's not about saying something mean, it's about saying something
> private.  Like a home address or medical condition.  A closed private
> mailing list in this case is no different than manally typing in a
> list of addresses, except it's a lot more convenient and reliable.
>

You have alluded in the past to private complaints, and "people problems"
usually means the unpleasant aspects of people's personalities, so I'm a
little skeptical about this.

Also, a common case of a private discussion in gcc-land is that the
> steering committee never discusses new maintainers in public.  Privacy
> allows them to be candid amongs themselves, and prevents others from
> commenting when they shouldn't.  After they discuss, they make a

unified decision public.  This is generally recognized as "the right
> way" as it ensures that the people who are empowered to make the
> decisions can make the decisions, and the people who are not empowered
> to do so cannot influence the results.  (much like a jury trial, where
> the jurists discuss in private and announce a single result).
>

I'm not sure I'd hold up gcc as an example of the right way.  Debian does
it with open candidacy and voting and achieves pretty good results as well.
And those are gigantic projects relative to gEDA.

The situation with gEDA is we're lucky if we get *one* guy who wants to do
what Markus has been doing.  Yes, he can be abrasive.  But if that
consideration has caused him to be excluded in some way, and that in turn
caused him to do stuff that caused the current kerfuffle, I would call that
a
bad thing and an example how the private discussion approach is not
working particularly well.


> And John's name is spelled "Doty" :-)
>

That's annoying, he should change it so it matches what I think

--f46d043c7fba9d7d5d0521256a7d
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 10:58 AM, DJ Delorie <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a hr=
ef=3D"mailto:dj AT delorie DOT com" target=3D"_blank">dj AT delorie DOT com</a>&gt;</span=
> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;bo=
rder-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
&gt; +1.=C2=A0 John Doty has afterall pretty well demonstrated that his ski=
n<br>
<span class=3D"">&gt; is thick enough if you have something mean to say abo=
ut him it can<br>
&gt; go on a public list :)<br>
<br>
</span>It&#39;s not about saying something mean, it&#39;s about saying some=
thing<br>
private.=C2=A0 Like a home address or medical condition.=C2=A0 A closed pri=
vate<br>
mailing list in this case is no different than manally typing in a<br>
list of addresses, except it&#39;s a lot more convenient and reliable.<br><=
/blockquote><div><br></div><div style=3D"">You have alluded in the past to =
private complaints, and &quot;people problems&quot;</div><div style=3D"">us=
ually means the unpleasant aspects of people&#39;s personalities, so I&#39;=
m a</div><div style=3D"">little skeptical about this.</div><div style=3D"">=
<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;bord=
er-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Also, a common case of a private discussion in gcc-land is that the<br>
steering committee never discusses new maintainers in public.=C2=A0 Privacy=
<br>
allows them to be candid amongs themselves, and prevents others from<br>
commenting when they shouldn&#39;t.=C2=A0 After they discuss, they make a=
=C2=A0</blockquote><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 =
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
unified decision public.=C2=A0 This is generally recognized as &quot;the ri=
ght<br>
way&quot; as it ensures that the people who are empowered to make the<br>
decisions can make the decisions, and the people who are not empowered<br>
to do so cannot influence the results.=C2=A0 (much like a jury trial, where=
<br>
the jurists discuss in private and announce a single result).<br></blockquo=
te><div><br></div><div style=3D"">I&#39;m not sure I&#39;d hold up gcc as a=
n example of the right way.=C2=A0 Debian does</div><div style=3D"">it with =
open candidacy and voting and achieves pretty good results as well.</div><d=
iv style=3D"">And those are gigantic projects relative to gEDA.</div><div s=
tyle=3D""><br></div><div style=3D"">The situation with gEDA is we&#39;re lu=
cky if we get *one* guy who wants to do</div><div style=3D"">what Markus ha=
s been doing.=C2=A0 Yes, he can be abrasive.=C2=A0 But if that</div><div st=
yle=3D"">consideration has caused him to be excluded in some way, and that =
in turn</div><div style=3D"">caused him to do stuff that caused the current=
 kerfuffle, I would call that a=C2=A0</div><div style=3D"">bad thing and an=
 example how the private discussion approach is not=C2=A0</div><div style=
=3D"">working particularly well.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D=
"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding=
-left:1ex">
And John&#39;s name is spelled &quot;Doty&quot; :-)<br></blockquote><div><b=
r></div><div style=3D"">That&#39;s annoying, he should change it so it matc=
hes what I think</div><div>=C2=A0</div></div><br></div></div>

--f46d043c7fba9d7d5d0521256a7d--