From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 461A41380DC for ; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 06:13:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C123CE0CA5; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 06:13:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from baptiste.telenet-ops.be (baptiste.telenet-ops.be [195.130.132.51]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A49EBE0C11 for ; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 06:13:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by baptiste.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id NuDW1n00l2khLEN01uDWJh; Thu, 06 Feb 2014 07:13:31 +0100 Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 07:11:56 +0100 From: Tom Wijsman To: 1i5t5.duncan@cox.net Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] Re: dropping redundant stable keywords Message-ID: <20140206071156.62e0e978@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: References: <52E7DBC1.5020102@gentoo.org> <20140128182304.7d458a17@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> <20140203062524.GA7467@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> <20140203104341.2add2760@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140204210319.GA1935@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> <20140205010833.1bcf8dca@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <1391559808.3520.2.camel@oswin.hackershack.net> <20140205020742.048cef9f@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <1391564122.3520.4.camel@oswin.hackershack.net> <20140205024806.7d08cb63@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <1391570147.3520.7.camel@oswin.hackershack.net> <20140205055544.6c3affea@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <1391616442.3160.6.camel@oswin.hackershack.net> <20140206031254.7ef65acb@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> <20140206035324.071a0f93@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.22; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: b4c11616-1e97-4ccf-8cbc-150757435bfb X-Archives-Hash: 25716d8a8babc1db4c7a590c69c8e487 On Thu, 6 Feb 2014 05:21:51 +0000 (UTC) Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote: > (OTOH, acknowledging that this is in itself DH2/tone or > DH0/name-calling, tho with a counterargument to a slightly different > point so I guess it's DH4, I'm compelled to observe that repeatedly > asking "Why?" as a one-word reply calls to mind the young child's > constant "Why?" stage... a bit after they get past the earlier > constant "NO!" stage... As about any parent or children's care giver > can certainly attest, it /does/ get frustrating at some point. > Perhaps you were simply trying to up the DH level, but in that case, > something beyond "Why?" could have been useful. Arguably simply and > repeatedly asking "Why?", without any indication even of what > particular bit you're "whying", must be a parallel form of DH1 or at > best DH2, ad hominem or tone. Once was arguably useful, but after > seeing it used multiple times in multiple replies, the usefulness was > entirely gone and the single word question was no longer a useful > contribution to the discussion. Please reconsider that technique in > the light of your above link before repetitive use in the future, and > at least make it a useful sentence, not simply the one word, because > especially when repeated, that single one word really does look > childish and tends to increase frustration and reduce the quality of > the discussion.) There's only a single occurrence of a single-word "Why?" without any other question on the line, there is another single occurence of a single-word "Why?" with a long "How ...?" on the same line; it was not used repetitively, and the "Why?" on its own is made when we're down a DH in this thread that's already extremely low in which point my DH isn't any more disrespectful than its context. However, pointing this single occurrence out in its own as well as nitpicking on it together is something I'd like to avoid here; let me instead just point out that most occurrences of those questions were in full text. And if we can't ask questions in full text anymore; then, I'm unable to see how a discussion can be held at all. Fwiw, the very same person I made that single one-word "Why?" to has previously appreciated that I asked him. You are welcome to point out where you think that I went to a lower DH; but when you do, please do it in private as to avoid extra noise. At least when we're talking here about doing this after the fact; when a natural discussion is ongoing, a proper respectful disagreement is of course welcome in which case you can do it in public with us. As long as it addresses the central point of the discussion... I've been considering a while not responding to messages of lower DH; just like the message you have jut made, but in doing so that would even be more disconstructive than to constructively try to make the best out of the thread. Some people will see this discussion as popcorn material, and rather useless; but out of this and the IRC communication that happened afterwards we've got at least (thanks to Rick): 1) clear there's a misunderstanding; 2) it being discussed and voted on again at the next Gentoo QA meeting; 3) Steev got to a discussion with the arm team, which lead to the idea to evaluate the usefulness of the stages and more; and there'll be more to come, to realize and to move Gentoo forward on. Consider what would have happened if we didn't go this far? It's scary. PS: Wrt. your other long response, I agree with a very large part of it. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D