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 1Hw0AB-0000Pm-LJ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 06 Jun 2007 18:23:20 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l56IJejZ014757; Wed, 6 Jun 2007 18:19:40 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l56IFhSw008939 for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2007 18:15:44 GMT Received: from [192.168.1.104] (unknown [64.207.228.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37F2E6441C for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2007 18:15:43 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4666F980.6030708@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 13:14:24 -0500 From: Steev Klimaszewski User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070419) 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^2 References: <1181074192.12669.16.camel@antares.hausnetz> <1181076263l.6873l.1l@spike> <20070605211348.GC1171@superlupo.rechner> <1181080828.17690.132.camel@workbox.quova.com> <20070606152947.GH26971@feynman.corp.halliburton.com> <87r6op55n4.fsf@phoenix.asynchronous.org> In-Reply-To: <87r6op55n4.fsf@phoenix.asynchronous.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: cce1807c-8319-45c9-9067-a7ef95d2abfe X-Archives-Hash: cfbe8203fa6f06438ffa22691a8bbe52 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Josh Sled wrote: > Grant Goodyear writes: > >> got out of hand. Perhaps the goal was laudable, but the methods were >> not? (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to >> be a proctor directive.) Or are people really looking for the proctors >> to get involved only when behavior is particularly egregious? Is there > > I find it disappointing (maybe "telling", if one is less charitable) that the > Proctors never censured the original poster for either the tone of the > message, nor the personal invective it contained, and still haven't. I'd > imagine clear violations of the CoC to result in at least a public > admonishment and warning. > The proctors have no power now, thanks to Chris publicly stabbing them in the back after they tried to assert some of their powers - they requested that no one respond to the thread for 24 hours, and people couldn't respect that simple request - and now with what Chris said, it just fuels the flames due to Council "backing" them - as Ciaran has already asserted in a mail earlier in the thread. Great job Chris, way to stick it to them. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGZvmA1c+EtXTHkJcRAhgZAJ92BOAq8cd+Tp1cxXSUC8sNvw5eUwCfeOeF Kh4cZO7lgVAleBC5s20zZmY= =0PzG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list