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 1HxsOm-0003Bx-Py for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:30:09 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l5BMT61G008689; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:29:06 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 l5BMRCFD006429 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:27:13 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C049D64C6B for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:27:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: 0.629 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.629 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.624, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=1.253] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zvGla1J+iERh for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:27:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC57C650ED for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:26:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Hxs18-0002aq-SY for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 00:05:43 +0200 Received: from 82.153.71.113 ([82.153.71.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 00:05:42 +0200 Received: from slong by 82.153.71.113 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 00:05:42 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Steve Long Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: [RFC]: gentoo-politics ML Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:54:31 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4667A38B.7070308@gentoo.org> <20070611021535.GE5778@seldon> <20070611114130.1fe1925a@snowflake> <466D3245.6020707@gentoo.org> <20070611123759.77ba497b@snowflake> <466D419E.1090608@fh-trier.de> <8cd1ed20706110634q149e0f06sa8412d1a88f6ccb8@mail.gmail.com> <466D7FDB.5030304@gentoo.org> <8cd1ed20706111333w200f2c3fyd8349b1d622b34db@mail.gmail.com> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.153.71.113 User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4 Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 7846c2e5-1b4f-4381-ae30-d649a934b011 X-Archives-Hash: 380b34122a2fd14a9255a31531a4378e Kent Fredric wrote: > On 6/12/07, Alexander Gabert wrote: >> There are others like him and there will be others after him. There >> were even people doing that before him. > As with trolls, theres more where they came for, but that doesn't make > gentoo-ML 'different' to as to how we slay a troll. > > I agree with matthias. If somebody's a troll, then you ignore them, > you make no attempt to reply to their post, and thus escape a > massacre. Its just that some times people think that by _not_ replying > to a trollish argument, that somehow the troll 'wins' . I figure, that > this being a gentoo-dev room, most the people in here have their head > screwed on and can know what a troll looks like when they see one, and > act accordingly to the 'leave them alone and they'll go away' policy. > Otherwise all your reply does is _guarantee_ they've won, because > nothing you say or do about a troll, bar ignoring them, will make any > good come to pass. Then either the troll will go away, or stop > trolling. > I agree with you in the general case but not the specific. In this case, I feel the constant drip-drip effect is depressing. Furthermore, outsiders read the list and see these melodramatic claims about the uselessness of the current development process which are never answered. From what you're saying this is embarrassed silence, as with a senile relative. Until I was informed of the error, I assumed it was because the troll was actually right. He certainly has vocal allies on every Gentoo medium. I actually used to believe their claims on the forums, I am forced to admit. Normally a troll dies from being ignored as the attention is their reward. In this case however, I feel the intention is political, to gain acceptance for Paludis as the one true package manager, since after all Paludis is useless without the portage tree. (Hence the troll's insistence that the "ebuild tree" defines Gentoo, when in application terms ebuild is no more or less than the portage file format. Using the same format to do the same task in OpenOffice doesn't stop doc being the Word file format, for example.) Why he can't just fork is beyond me; it's not like access to the portage tree is restricted, as sabayon can attest. The irony of the troll's complaints about Gentoo QA when his closest ally is QA lead, is vintage though. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list