From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B82C91387FD for ; Sun, 6 Apr 2014 17:02:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C046EE0AC0; Sun, 6 Apr 2014 17:02:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01F40E0ABC for ; Sun, 6 Apr 2014 17:02:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (unknown [107.161.158.146]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hasufell) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 38E0533FEB4 for ; Sun, 6 Apr 2014 17:01:59 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <53418884.2070000@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2014 17:01:56 +0000 From: hasufell Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-04-08 References: <53342A5F.70903@gentoo.org> <201404061435.00789.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <53414CD2.4030100@gentoo.org> <53416E80.40605@gentoo.org> <534172D6.6040204@gentoo.org> <20140406181722.615ab6f4@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20140406181722.615ab6f4@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: da6b4ecc-896e-4e79-a2fa-a2e73ea123db X-Archives-Hash: 03ce538898117b2f274196861cf66f27 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Tom Wijsman: >> Is this what I can expect from sticking around in Gentoo? > > When people (yes, multiple) resort to reverting commits and/or > filing ComRel bugs instead of appropriate discussion and escalation > ... yes. > No, this does not conform with CoC. QA members don't have a special right to be insulting on a non-technical level, even if people don't follow their policies. I am used to rude/blunt language and often prefer it over other forms... but there is a line when it becomes random abusive language. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJTQYiEXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQzMDlCNDQ4NjEyNDI4NjA5REVEMDI3MzIy MjBDRDFDNUJERUVEMDIwAAoJECIM0cW97tAgGakP/iHPIV8+8ljp0GNJUB0khIC+ OnHWmiQhTrkcPA8z0mCPty7EOlHNvuSOZolFKpKkDdosEpnBZuffgi3c5SiliyPj TWTgHJum6nnUxKf6PJacIeWK2LHqXDEx+crEs+OgvQJ2hYJfWL2Bb8jM+M7GCXYA 7kuq5YInnxY4sTW2CWZQdL0sxPht5iSVgwv2kzYBINO4z7vHmNn6Yqv0nRpNI+ee U9vxjcl3Ygpc9qL7M1BM2EGcvnh7id6gnVXk8VY+DKSLcyFDhCN5nVteiwYi36I7 8qNkWZdRiPGEAwshYCSx1QsGjfsiNvFQninaNu19CuxhpSAKFh95pwPY5skElfxx 4RPC+ifjkmWlQpf+/ZZVVEq6An1kFX5jCJbYHRFKDvM/j9jSih9EvBPvH+ZG/iGZ 6a4x2/VcTZMgfJ3AH6CgzkVYcJv1Ujlpg6HF/c8S/P30Mj0CdqG6F9eAI0PbD6+r wU4jb9pgrrUZRwUmuBpZ4SbhM8exbOvIGyYHY3x0noTONqlVR6ICENud5v+SYRKq HrqrIFrIxlXnPBK24cBwlDvq3DUoa4wzunNk2mjxqtas0pmmZmFTV9xXtWqv0CJP DNglfm1xg01G070rz8wE8hxjGagNOBaAdPYWDPxNlujofBW7o/7T+Ccj/N0nzWb1 Wx5ShbO6kf6TGPTw5pod =tZBS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----