From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07F0D139083 for ; Sun, 3 Dec 2017 22:07:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 417B9E0F91; Sun, 3 Dec 2017 22:06:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0692DE0F55; Sun, 3 Dec 2017 22:06:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-it0-f45.google.com (mail-it0-f45.google.com [209.85.214.45]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mattst88) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D047333BF05; Sun, 3 Dec 2017 22:06:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f45.google.com with SMTP id d137so2235778itc.2; Sun, 03 Dec 2017 14:06:57 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mLKo7/8cb8Fj7qslPqpHE6rMv/wV/JuP6rwudb1N91aBeP0Zajr c9jDNsEuW6oNeoQtp4L5cAYPv9CU5kF1Kxj9sqw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZizTbMlsCrZyg4TZ7L+KWyLCZUtMyLPnjOwbnNX2zlRxccWnMjqG6r/b8qnX7M7zXlhSnEK5a+g6ONcTivOzo= X-Received: by 10.36.189.140 with SMTP id x134mr3568976ite.26.1512338815945; Sun, 03 Dec 2017 14:06:55 -0800 (PST) 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 Received: by 10.2.152.46 with HTTP; Sun, 3 Dec 2017 14:06:35 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1512256684.30000.48.camel@gentoo.org> References: <1512256684.30000.48.camel@gentoo.org> From: Matt Turner Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2017 14:06:35 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] [RFC] Splitting developer-oriented and expert user mailing lists To: Gentoo project list Cc: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 0fb75e74-7fd1-47b7-a996-408ab7df9ae5 X-Archives-Hash: b677036227b39a36f4092c43e1fa23f4 On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny = wrote: > The problems of more abusive behavior from some of the mailing list > members have been reported to ComRel numerous times. After the failure > of initial enforcement, I'm not aware of ComRel doing anything to solve > the problem. The main arguments I've heard from ComRel members were: > > A. Bans can be trivially evaded, and history proves that those evasions > create more noise than leaving the issue as is. That's absurd. "We shouldn't enforce rules because people can break the rul= es" > B. People should be allowed to express their opinion [even if it's pure > hate speech that carries no value to anyone]. That's absurd. There's no reason to have to tolerate non-constructive conversation on our own mailing lists. Classify it as off topic. We tell people their posts are off topic for a particular mailing list all the time. > C. The replies of Gentoo developers were worse [no surprise that people > lose their patience after being attacked for a few months]. That's absurd. You have to look at where the problem starts to fix it, not engage in whataboutism. > The alternative suggested by ComRel pretty much boiled down to 'ignore > the trolls'. While we can see this is actually starting to happen right > now (even the most determined developers stopped replying), this doesn't > really solve the problem because: That's absurd. The whole point of bringing problems to ComRel is so they can solve it. Telling people to deal with it is explicitly not solving the problem. The Gentoo community (not just the developers) would stand to benefit from a capable and competent ComRel team. It's very sad that we don't have that. Unfortunately, my experience is much the same as yours. ComRel explicitly refused to act when a bug reporter was repeatedly abusive, instead arguing that he didn't do anything wrong and that I shouldn't be so offended. Even the user disagreed with ComRel, apologizing and saying that his own behavior was out of line when I confronted him. That's absurd.