MESSAGE
| DATE | 2015-03-15 |
| FROM | prmarino1@gmail.com
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Linux Kernel Mailing List Social Protocols
|
Rubin
The incident I was referring to was before the systemd issues.
Also let's not forget Adam stopped participating in our group because of what he thought was a physical threat agains him by one of the members of the list. He asked us repeatedly to do something about it and because no actions were taken we lost a very valuable member of the group. That happened over a decade ago. Furthermore the person who the complaint was about was not the most effective member of the group and left the group in an angry huff a year or two after that.
This is a serious issue the free software community and the open-source community has allowed to grow for far too long.
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
Original Message
From: Ruben
Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2015 05:13
To: hangout-at-nylxs.com
Reply To: hangout-at-nylxs.com
Subject: Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Linux Kernel Mailing List Social Protocols
On 03/10/2015 01:19 PM, Paul Robert Marino wrote:
> Rubin
> Have you actually read it there is no statement of censorship at all
> in fact the reverse its basically states that inevitably occasionally
> frustrations will run high because every one is trying to do their
> best to enhance the kernel as much as possible; however if you feel
> some one is being excessively abusive or threatening report it so they
> can attempt to resolve the situation.
>
> I agree with it there have been a lot of conversations which get out
> of hand on some lists which do go as far as physical threats. lets
> face it the majority of the Linux community are passionate about the
> technology and that breads a certain level of necessary debate which
> can often get heated. Evin I have to admit on ocassion Ive been know
> to get so frustrated on a list with people who were out of their
> league in a conversation but claimed to be an authority on the subject
> that I've filliped out and started making fun of them. and lord knows
> how many technical flame wars which had enough real technical merits
> on the opposing side that i couldn't just dismiss them but got
> extremely heated during the course of the debate. These thing happen
> and are never eliminate that from the community nor should we want to
> because often those debates lead to better results than one individual
> could come up with on their own.
>
> That said occasionally you run across a few people who are just
> mentally ill and use our community as a venue to feed their insanity
> or get off on their rage issues, and add nothing productive to the
> process. That is unacceptable
> and we as a community need to filter those people out so we can get
> meaningful productive work done. Equally as important we also need to
> be able to recognize and help people who are use to scientific debates
> to form a thicker skin about it if they are over reacting to comments
> made during a debate. To accomplish both of these task we need people
> to report if they feel they are being verbally assaulted or physically
> threatened for no reliant reason and look at each incident and
> evaluate it because part of the community has gotten out of hand.
>
> For example a few years ago while at a bar a member of NYBUG asked me
> to come out side and have a cigaret with him, as soon as we got out
> side he started pressing his finger into my chest and treated me never
> call him on his bull shit ever again.
I've had my share of run ins with people from the BSD group and I think
... I don't know. there is something deeply wrong with most of them.
It is hard to create a community and even harder in NYC, for reasons
I've never understood.
We grew up with pick up baseball and sports and I can't get people to
come to meetings that are in their best interest, and only the craziest
ones show up...
> Now those weren't quite the
> words he used but it definitely was a threat. Considering where and
> how I grew up his threats didn't scare me a bit they only made me very
> angry and still do, but I can see how others would be scared because
> he could be considered by many a physically imposing and the setup
> seemed a little too practiced I am positive he has done it to others
> as well. now some people may be ask what started this well essentially
> he was telling a story about something that happened at one of the NYC
> Linux world expos where he made himself sound like the only sane
> person involved and was badmouthing a lot of good people. I guess he
> forgot I was there involved in the entire situation and a know it was
> the exact opposite of what he claimed. As a result I didn't insult him
> but I did verbally knock him down a peg by telling the group some of
> what really happens and told him to stop insulting friend of mine he
> doesn't really know. his response was to get me someplace with no one
> around and threaten physical violence.
> This kind of behavior is nuts and has no place in our community!
>
Anyway, this is still just a means to set up rules to confine the
brewing conflicts that have spilled into the kernels list and nearly
everywhere else in the GNU/Linux world as systemd proponents
relentlessly look for levers to turn.
>
> here is the actual statement in
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/CodeOfConflict?id=b0bc65729070b9cbdbb53ff042984a3c545a0e34
> "
>
> Code of Conflict
> ----------------
>
> The Linux kernel development effort is a very personal process compared
> to "traditional" ways of developing software. Your code and ideas
> behind it will be carefully reviewed, often resulting in critique and
> criticism. The review will almost always require improvements to the
> code before it can be included in the kernel. Know that this happens
> because everyone involved wants to see the best possible solution for
> the overall success of Linux. This development process has been proven
> to create the most robust operating system kernel ever, and we do not
> want to do anything to cause the quality of submission and eventual
> result to ever decrease.
>
> If however, anyone feels personally abused, threatened, or otherwise
> uncomfortable due to this process, that is not acceptable. If so,
> please contact the Linux Foundation's Technical Advisory Board at
> , or the individual members, and they
> will work to resolve the issue to the best of their ability. For more
> information on who is on the Technical Advisory Board and what their
> role is, please see:
> http://www.linuxfoundation.org/programs/advisory-councils/tab
>
> As a reviewer of code, please strive to keep things civil and focused on
> the technical issues involved. We are all humans, and frustrations can
> be high on both sides of the process. Try to keep in mind the immortal
> words of Bill and Ted, "Be excellent to each other."
>
>
> "
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 5:23 AM, Ruben Safir wrote:
>> https://www.linux.com/news/featured-blogs/158-jim-zemlin/815318-on-the-linux-kernels-code-of-conflict
>>
>> I don't buy it. the last thing we need is thought police on the Linux
>> Kernel list...
>>
>> Last week, 60 kernel developers signed off on a small patch
>> called
>> the Code of Conflict that provides guidelines for discourse in the
>> kernel community and outlines a path for mediation if someone feels
>> abused or threatened. The code was written by kernel maintainer Greg
>> K-H, supported by many of the most prolific maintainers and developers
>> of the kernel community and accepted into the kernel by Linus Torvalds
>> himself.
>>
>> The Linux Foundation is happy to see these guidelines and is supportive
>> of the mediation process. We will work directly with the Linux
>> Foundation Technical Advisory Board to provide whatever support they
>> need in implementing this process. We believe the guidelines are
>> grounded in the unique culture and process that makes Linux so
>> successful. Conflict over code will and should happen. But the Code is
>> very clear that personal insults or abuse are not welcome.
>>
>> It’s no secret that the software industry would like to see more
>> diversity. The Linux Foundation believes in that. While this code does
>> not address that directly, we feel it’s an important step to make clear
>> that civil discourse is an important part of an open source community
>> and to make it very plain that all are welcome. Over the last few years,
>> The Linux Foundation has undertaken a variety of programs to address the
>> diversity issue. From funding kernel internships to being one of the
>> first organizations to publish a code of conduct for our events, we take
>> the need for diversity seriously and plan on continuing and expanding
>> these programs as well as supporting the community in their efforts.
>>
>> There is a long way to go, but the kernel community is always evolving
>> and we feel this patch is an important step.
>>
>>
|
|
