From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-2720-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org> Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C91AA1381F3 for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 07:23:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3EDE1E096C; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 07:23:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from icp-osb-irony-out9.external.iinet.net.au (icp-osb-irony-out9.external.iinet.net.au [203.59.1.226]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95525E096C for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 07:23:27 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgIFAGI5zVF8qVTn/2dsb2JhbABbgwnAA4EEFnSCIwEBBAE6LQUBBwoLCw0UJQ8QOBkZAYduBbtfglaNBoNlA4kghQuJGYZFg18Ehx6DHi+BLCQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,957,1363104000"; d="scan'208";a="122757735" Received: from unknown (HELO archtester.homenetwork) ([124.169.84.231]) by icp-osb-irony-out9.iinet.net.au with ESMTP; 28 Jun 2013 15:23:26 +0800 Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 15:23:21 +0800 From: IAN DELANEY <della5@iinet.com.au> To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Temporary DevRel actions for CoC violations Message-ID: <20130628152321.19f77e41@archtester.homenetwork> In-Reply-To: <CAG2jQ8iTEjdasHZk0oZUwyXg=uj6_C6SvE3Zy-r-f78hUhUrnw@mail.gmail.com> References: <51C1EBF5.3080707@gentoo.org> <51C37574.6080203@gentoo.org> <CAG2jQ8iTEjdasHZk0oZUwyXg=uj6_C6SvE3Zy-r-f78hUhUrnw@mail.gmail.com> Organization: homenetwork X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.17; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-project+help@lists.gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list <gentoo-project.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 3a953015-fdad-4f85-aa8a-59512d3a48e7 X-Archives-Hash: 383eb1ddf4b244660208ea0d9be9c3a2 On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 00:19:47 +0100 Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote: > > No it is not accurate. You need to read the threads again. For > example, nobody ever said that > we will punish people for calling a software "crap". Please read more > carefully what I wrote. > I also said that we will warn people before we kick them out. Again, > please read more carefully what > I wrote before. I'd like to pitch in here possibly in the magnitude of a grenade, don't really know, although I'm a little late to this party. the bulk of this I've copied from an attempt over a week ago which didn't make it thru to project ML, but it mostly pertinent to the topic at hand. It prob. belongs as a reply to the opening thread by Marcos. " To attempt a succinct summary here (an extended one will lose everyone), from the body of knowledge I gained from back in the day, sure people's basic personal traits are formed and set for life at various CRITICAL stages of youth, and the pages once writ aren't subject to being re-written. Our admins and devs are adults, predominantly very young adults with an established persona and values at entry to gentoo. The task here isn't to change the person at their core. If anyone is 'trained' to do that it's a psycho-analyst, not a gentoo dev or a Foundation member. The task here is to change that relatively thin shell that encompasses a person, namely outward behaviour. > If you need a slap to make you behave > nicely, then this is not going to work in the long-term. And you can't > improve a distribution technical wise, if you have people who can't > work together. > - We've been requesting this for a very very long time, yet 2 days ago > we had another incident. So I'd say, no, we can't. Snide, aggressive, hostile, insolent remarks wrapped in a common package of abuse and oft used 4 letter expletives are the topic at hand here I gather, and I don't know offhand what the recent incident is, but in the light of lxnay's extended highlighting of the subject and his declaration to collect his marbles and wander back home, for all the back slapping and encouraging to stick around because you're a good 'guy' / 'bloke' 'citizen', dev .. ' ' .., still the display of brash ignorance carries on it seems with impunity, undented, unaddressed, unabated, until now........... This isn't a case of managing the unmanageable, however its management frankly cries out for management skills that are simply not in the personal toolboxes of most who are in any way vaguely authorised and therefore in a position to 'pounce' on those of us who come out with naughty behaviour. To sketch out a rather black or bleak picture of this whole affair, assuming NeddySeagoon's depiction of devs (well and developer or admin personnel) as predominantly alpha males with retarded social skills, what we have here in >95% of cases is a case of 1 alpha male with retarded social skills made responsible for managing / reeling naughty outward behaviour of an alpha male with retarded social skills. Grief! No wonder lxnay buckled!! This outward behaviour is INDEED changeable, and hence manageable. in case you missed that This outward behaviour is INDEED changeable, and hence manageable. Outward behaviour is changeable, modifiable, malleable even. Modifying behaviour is for cryin' out loud a whole stream of the science known as psychology. Its technicians are termed behaviourists. Now for the bad news. Due to the rampant incidence of the above, we can anticipate this behaviour management coming to pass in our precious gentoo haven just as sure as we can expect pigs to sprout wings and fly. So despite my assertion that hwoarang's statement is erred in fact (a prior thread but never mind), it kind of becomes an utterly moot point since the formula to achieve this end requires, well, behaviourists. Let's invite all such duplicate qualified devs to submit their nominations for executing the CoC and ., eeer, oh bump, damn those flying pigs, got me right in the head. If there is any positive slant to this, my guess is that it's that behaviourists don't hold a monopoly on how to talk someone into finally gaining an insight that 'they're not the messiah, they're but very naughty boys'. So much of psychology has its roots in real life, hence many of the behaviourist's tools are to be found in the toolboxes of Joey Blogs with a cool composure and a mature head. This kind of maturity is in fact not confined to those experiencing the onset of greyed or absent hair, but also in some quick developers who are still in the category oft termed 'youngens', well, young adults. My experience of these outbursts of slander come insolence lead me to assert that; 1. The chief protagonists are also the chief outstanding contributors in gentoo, 2. They piously misbelieve that they have earned a right to throw out a series of 1 liner put downs at whim without hesitation since they have earned impunity by holding anyone who dares rebutt them to ransom by virtue of their prolific contribution history, therefore 3. despite being technical intellects, they are naively ignorant of how wrong they are in the prior assertions. They are, in a word, ignorant. We're not talking rapists and robbers behaviour, we're talking 'naughty talking'. Get a grip. This relatively 'minor' level of erroneous / aberrant behaviour surely falls into the category of unlearning what they internalised as 'ok / acceptable / normative' and re-learning higher social standards / norms. Any mature heads out there?????? " ------------------------------------------------ I'd like to propose a longer term method of this real issue. The key word is mentor. The aspect of rebuttal by punishment leaves a sour taste in everyone's mouth. I don't think that a punishment response here is the catchall fix, rather, an involuntary internship of offenders to one with a mature head. On devrel becoming notified and becoming aware of a dev being an offender, devrel then assesses and reviews the 'offensive data' and then can elect to put the dev under the supervision of one with a mature head, a new level mentor. Picking them is the hard part. Applying a simple principle of behaviourist theory, the rights of the dev are switched from being open slather, e.g. on all MLs, to you can't submit to this ML until your intended submission is vetted and approved by the ALLOCATED mentor. He has his wings clipped. Clipping wings in irc channels would be more difficult really. Commit rights I don't see as an apt target to be clipped since commits are purely technical data. The process here is to make an offender accountable for being (socially not technically) an ignorant dimwit shooting and shouting without due cause. He (there are no shes) then need earn his way back to a status of a full wing spread to re-use my analogy. Offensive remarks are basically remarks put in a clumsy hostile manner and I reckon mostly without even knowing it. Offensive is not cast in stone but is open to perception of the remark, so there is no choice here but to deal with the many shades of grey. There are many ways to skin the proverbial cat, and the task of the mentor is essentially to take on the involuntary and disgruntled mentoree and thrash out some come all of these many other ways that the remark can be revised re-worked, re-packaged and re-presented to the offendee minus its ugly uncalled for insolence and unwelcome baggage. Rationale; level headed valid feedback, back peddle on fundamental approach to expressing oneself, unlearn, re-learn, learn more. done The offendee's new level mentoreeship finishes when and only when agreed upon by the mentor unilaterally or in consensus with those of devrel. and that's the short version. Now for the flack. -- kind regards Ian Delaney