|FROM ||Ruben Safir
|SUBJECT ||Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Linux Kernel Mailing List Social Protocols
|From owner-hangout-outgoing-at-mrbrklyn.com Sun Mar 15 05:54:42 2015
Received: by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix)
id 9986F1612E5; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 05:54:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix, from userid 28)
id 89DBD1612EE; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 05:54:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailbackend.panix.com (mailbackend.panix.com [220.127.116.11])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF7ED1612E5
for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 05:54:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from panix2.panix.com (panix2.panix.com [18.104.22.168])
by mailbackend.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57A1211F9E
for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 05:54:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by panix2.panix.com (Postfix, from userid 20529)
id 4CC2833C98; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 05:54:18 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 05:54:18 -0400
From: Ruben Safir
Subject: Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Linux Kernel Mailing List Social Protocols
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
List-Id: NYLXS General Discussion Forum
do yuou have a tool to convert pdfs to html
how do you edit grub.cfg?
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 05:42:59AM -0400, prmarino1-at-gmail.com wrote:
> 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.