From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HvhR1-0007IX-OV for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 22:23:28 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l55MKwKa017090; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 22:20:58 GMT Received: from alpha.total-knowledge.com (alpha.total-knowledge.com [205.217.158.170]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l55MHjQW012977 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 22:17:46 GMT Received: (qmail 19062 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2007 15:17:30 -0700 Received: from unknown (HELO iluxalaptop.total-knowledge.com) (ilya@67.115.118.5) by alpha.total-knowledge.com with ESMTPA; 5 Jun 2007 15:17:30 -0700 Message-ID: <4665E103.7030705@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 15:17:39 -0700 From: "Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh" Organization: Total Knowledge User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070521) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Living in a bubble [gentoo-proctor] Warning References: <1181074192.12669.16.camel@antares.hausnetz> <1181076263l.6873l.1l@spike> <20070605215216.09daad6b@snowflake> <1181080825.17690.131.camel@workbox.quova.com> In-Reply-To: <1181080825.17690.131.camel@workbox.quova.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 1b101450-7e67-49c6-b733-aaa0ff12090b X-Archives-Hash: a4660259631cd1533917e56e86372610 Perhaps it would be a good time to try another approach to the problem? How about proctors that are responsible for ensuring any arguments stay within bounds of technical discussion and formal logic rules? Chris Gianelloni wrote: > I really have to agree with you. The proctors have completely lost > their way. They are ineffective. They tend to compound the problems > they were created to stop. They are slow. They have not prevented > anything, which was the reason for their creation. Rather, what they > *have* done is stifle conversation, piss off people, get in the way of > Developer Relations reports, and otherwise making developers feel like > they don't want to participate in our official discussion channels. > > What do I think needs to be done? > > The proctors project needs to go away. It simply wasn't implemented in > the way the Council had hoped and has proven to be more harmful than the > original problems to morale and inter-developer trust. While the > individual members might be doing what they think is best and trying > their best, they've failed at the goals of improving our communications > channels. > > -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list