Re: [gentoo-project] ComRel membership vs politeness on mailing lists

[Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3995 bytes --]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 14:38:34 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-06-19 at 08:03 +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 20:33:09 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2019-06-18 at 19:20 +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 09:43:05 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, 2019-06-16 at 23:00 +0000, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > > > > > Only active Gentoo developers who are also Foundation members may be
> > > > > > nominated. [1]
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Nominations MUST be made by posting to gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org, and
> > > > > > the nominated candidate must accept not later than the end of the
> > > > > > nomination period.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ok, let's try someone else.  I nominate:
> > > > > 
> > > > > David Seifert (soap)
> > > > > Mikle Kolyada (zlogene)
> > > > 
> > > > You violated the rules:
> > > >   Nominations MUST be made by posting to gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org
> > > > 
> > > > But you sent them to gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org mail list.
> > > > Hereby they are not valid. Please perform your duty properly and
> > > > send nominations to the aforementioned NFP mail list.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > You could also have understood it was a honest mistake and be nice about
> > > it.  But I suppose that's too much to expect from a ComRel member.
> > 
> > I politely pointed out your mistake and nicely asked you to fix it.
> > I even used the word "please". I honestly don't see what was not
> > nice about my previous e-mail. Maybe we have a language barrier
> > issue here.
> > 
> > My comrel membership has nothing to do with this discussion and
> > I'm participating in it as a common Gentoo developer with my comrel
> > hat off.
> > 
> 
> Do you really believe that a ComRel member (read: a person whose duty
> involves judging other people's behavior) can just take ComRel hat off
> and stop caring about providing exemplary behavior?

I do believe that I am free to express my private opinion on any
public subject as long as such expression is within common sense
communication requirements, e.g. contains no obscene language,
humiliation or intentional misinformation and so on.

> Following that
> logic, I could join ComRel claiming that all the things I've said
> and done were 'with my comrel hat off' (since I don't have any)!
> 
> I understand that there might be a language barrier.  However, since you
> decide to perform a very specific and important role, I'm afraid you
> need to learn to use English in a way that's actually polite rather than
> using the excuse of a language barrier.

The language barrier works both ways. As far as I know English is
not your native language.
 
> Let me explain.
> 
> A neutral (i.e. not really polite but acceptable) way of saying that
> would be to say 'you have posted the nominations to the wrong list'. 
> That's plain and factual.
> 
> You said 'you violated the rules' which is an accusation.

First and foremost this is the plain statement of the fact. As the
QA team member you have to understand that rules are the same for
everyone. Requiring special treatment is not fair to fellow
developers.

>  Accusations
> tend to render one as guilty of doing something very bad.  Accusations
> are not polite.
> 
> Furthermore, 'perform your duty properly' is passive aggressive.

The Oxford dictionary contains different definition of the
"passive-aggressive":
https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/passive-aggressive

Let me quote it:

"Definition of passive-aggressive in English:
passive-aggressive
adjective

Of or denoting a type of behaviour or personality characterized by
indirect resistance to the demands of others and an avoidance of
direct confrontation."

Excuse me, but I trust the Oxford dictionary more.

Interesting, that your response to my initial message fits well in
the definition quoted above.

Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]