Amir, what you are suggesting at this point is basically that it doesn't
matter because that bug report was closed once and intended to remain
closed (despite being reopened) with reason that the WordPress website
isn't ready for public consumption yet was made public to replace the
previous. If the intent was to test something, should have done so
privately. All we are doing now is just dragging this on and blowing up
simply because of communication failures.
Since someone insisted a couple messages ago, if this isn't a hobby project
yet is donation funded then what exactly is this considered? Doubtful it
counts as volunteer led if the foundation seems to insist on their way
judging by level executives. WMF is funded by donations and grants, it's a
non profit...not for commercial profit so there is a serious disconnect
going on
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 3:42 PM <wikitech-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
wrote:
Send Wikitech-l mailing list submissions to
wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
wikitech-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
wikitech-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Wikitech-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: [Wikimedia-l] C-team Statement on the Code of Conduct
(Amir Ladsgroup)
2. Re: [Wikimedia-l] C-team Statement on the Code of Conduct (Pine W)
3. Re: [Wikimedia-l] C-team Statement on the Code of Conduct
(Isarra Yos)
4. Re: My Phabricator account has been disabled (Petr Bena)
5. Re: My Phabricator account has been disabled (Amir Ladsgroup)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 20:08:57 +0200
From: Amir Ladsgroup <ladsgroup(a)gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Cc: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] [Wikimedia-l] C-team Statement on the Code
of Conduct
Message-ID:
<
CA+ttme0tKn3xEnw4ayaQ-VxHu5-jvPp30eHOqKG6vpOvSQMMmA(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hey,
As a member of Code of conduct committee I just wanted to express how much
I appreciate your statement. The work we are doing is not fun, we are
dealing with frustrations, harassments, trolling, and all sorts of the dark
side of the Wikimedia movement but I genuinely believe that this type of
work is vital to keep the movement moving forward, to make us more
welcoming and foster a diverse environment.
All of the support I've received, private and public, online and offline is
overwhelming. Thank you, Thank you, Thank you.
Best
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 7:46 PM Victoria Coleman <vcoleman(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
Hello everyone,
The executive leadership team, on behalf of the Foundation, would like to
issue a statement of unequivocal support for the Code of Conduct[1] and
the
community-led Code of Conduct Committee. We
believe that the development
and implementation of the Code are vital in ensuring the healthy
functioning of our technical communities and spaces. The Code of Conduct
was created to address obstacles and occasionally very problematic
personal
communications that limit participation and cause
real harm to community
members and staff. In engaging in this work we are setting the tone for
the
ways we collaborate in tech. We are saying that
treating others badly is
not welcome in our communities. And we are joining an important movement
in
the tech industry to address these problems in a
way that supports
self-governance consistent with our values.
This initiative is critical in continuing the amazing work of our
projects
and ensuring that they continue to flourish in
delivering on the critical
vision of being the essential infrastructure of free knowledge now and
forever.
Toby, Maggie, Eileen, Heather, Lisa, Katherine, Jaime, Joady, and
Victoria
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 18:17:00 +0000
From: Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>rg>,
"wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org"
<wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] [Wikimedia-l] C-team Statement on the Code
of Conduct
Message-ID:
<CAF=dyJhZHEM-2h=
wMXh+cAWNOPqq8akg742dJE0kiP7Pp9Ys4g(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
James, let's stay on topic, please. If you want to talk about other issues
then please start a new thread.
Victoria, I have mixed feelings about this statement.
I agree that we want to have civility in technical spaces, and a technical
code of conduct is one important way of working toward that goal. I also
agree that having ways to resolve disputes and deal with problematic
behavior is important.
On the other hand, I think several aspects of your statement are less than
ideal.
* This situation is being discussed civilly in a single thread on
Wikitech-l, and I see no reason to start a new thread.
* You added Wikimedia-l to this discussion, and Wikimedia-l is outside of
the scope of the TCoC. I think that adding Wikimedia-l to the discussion is
an unnecessary escalation. Please refrain from unnecessary escalations.
* While the opinions of the WMF executives are somewhat influential, my
understanding is that WMF wants the Technical Code of Conduct and the
committee that enforces it to have political legitimacy in the community.
Involvement of the WMF C-levels works against that. I think that you should
let the participants in the discussion (which I feel is now generally tense
but constructive) work out this situation among themselves / ourselves
without the intervention of WMF executives. Although there are situations
in which the intervention of WMF executives would be helpful, I think that
this isn't one of them.
* The statement that you made comes across to me as endorsing the status
quo. I am not sure that this was your intent. I feel that adjustments to
policies and practices should be considered, partially based on the
constructive portions of the discussions that are happening on Wikitech-l.
I agree that the TCoC Committee has a difficult job when the try to do it
well, and I support the goal of having civility in technical spaces. I
think that it would be possible, and appropriate, to express support for
good-faith efforts of the Committee's members and those participating in
the discussion in Wikitech-l, and for the goals of the CoC, without
unnecessary escalation or intervention from WMF executives that may make a
difficult situation more challenging. Sometimes less involvement is the
better way to achieve one's goals.
Thank you for listening,
Pine
(
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 18:23:18 +0000
From: Isarra Yos <zhorishna(a)gmail.com>
To: wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org, Wikimedia developers
<wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] [Wikimedia-l] C-team Statement on the Code
of Conduct
Message-ID: <80dea45d-9ffc-020e-7ef5-c3b85c01c511(a)gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Sorry, I apparently replied to the wrong mailing list.
On 14/08/18 18:19, Isarra Yos wrote:
As a total random, I'd also like to second
this - as much as I think
the CoC and the committee in particular have room to improve in how
things are handled, this will never happen without proper support for
the work they're doing in the first place.
While some of us have been somewhat flabbergasted by specific events,
these are after all the people we need to be working with to actually
resolve the issues at hand, and indeed the events (and handling
thereof) themselves have also highlighted the need for more clearer
standards moving forward. I'm glad to see some steps have already been
taken. Let's continue in this vein.
Thank you!
-I
On 14/08/18 18:08, Amir Ladsgroup wrote:
Hey,
As a member of Code of conduct committee I just wanted to express how
much
I appreciate your statement. The work we are doing is not fun, we are
dealing with frustrations, harassments, trolling, and all sorts of
the dark
side of the Wikimedia movement but I genuinely believe that this type of
work is vital to keep the movement moving forward, to make us more
welcoming and foster a diverse environment.
All of the support I've received, private and public, online and
offline is
overwhelming. Thank you, Thank you, Thank you.
Best
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 7:46 PM Victoria Coleman
<vcoleman(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
Hello everyone,
The executive leadership team, on behalf of the Foundation, would
like to
issue a statement of unequivocal support for the Code of Conduct[1]
and the
community-led Code of Conduct Committee. We believe that the
development
and implementation of the Code are vital in ensuring the healthy
functioning of our technical communities and spaces. The Code of
Conduct
was created to address obstacles and occasionally very problematic
personal
communications that limit participation and cause real harm to
community
members and staff. In engaging in this work we are setting the tone
for the
ways we collaborate in tech. We are saying that treating others
badly is
not welcome in our communities. And we are joining an important
movement in
the tech industry to address these problems in a way that supports
self-governance consistent with our values.
This initiative is critical in continuing the amazing work of our
projects
and ensuring that they continue to flourish in delivering on the
critical
vision of being the essential infrastructure of free knowledge now and
forever.
Toby, Maggie, Eileen, Heather, Lisa, Katherine, Jaime, Joady, and
Victoria
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct <
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 21:29:42 +0200
From: Petr Bena <benapetr(a)gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] My Phabricator account has been disabled
Message-ID:
<CA+4EQ5eYsJ1FxEoyYukcXO9kVhN=zf_gzSs-1nAtH=
mZ2_NoPQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
I am OK if people who are attacking others are somehow informed that
this is not acceptable and taught how to properly behave, and if they
continue that, maybe some "preventive" actions could be taken, but is
that what really happened?
The comment by MZMcBride was censored, so almost nobody can really see
what it was and from almost all mails mentioning the content here it
appears he said "what the fuck" or WTF. I can't really think of any
language construct where this is so offensive it merits instant ban +
removal of content.
I don't think we need /any/ language policy in a bug tracker. If
someone says "this bug sucks old donkey's ****" it may sounds a bit
silly, but there isn't really any harm done. If you say "Jimbo, you
are a f**** retard, and all your code stinks" then that's a problem,
but I have serious doubts that's what happened. And the problem is not
a language, but personal attack itself.
If someone is causing problems LET THEM KNOW and talk to them. Banning
someone instantly is worst possible thing you can do. You may think
our community is large enough already so that we can set up this kind
of strict and annoying policies and rules, but I guarantee you, it's
not. We have so many open bugs in phabricator that every user could
take hundreds of them... We don't need to drive active developers away
by giving them bans that are hardly justified.
P.S. if someone saying "WTF" is really giving you creeps, I seriously
recommend you to try to develop a bit thicker skin, even if we build
an "Utopia" as someone mentioned here, it's gonna be practical for
interactions in real world, which is not always friendly and nice. And
randomly banning people just for saying WTF, with some cryptic
explanation, seems more 1984 style Dystopia to me...
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 4:08 PM, David Barratt <dbarratt(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
>
> Again, this isn't enwiki, but there would be a large mob gathering at
the
>> administrators' doorstep on enwiki for a block without that context and
>> backstory.
>>
>
> That seems like really toxic behavior.
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 6:27 AM George Herbert <george.herbert(a)gmail.com
>
> wrote:
>
>> I keep seeing "abusers" and I still haven't seen the evidence of
the
>> alleged long term abuse pattern.
>
> Again, this isn't enwiki, but there would be a large mob gathering at
the
> administrators' doorstep on enwiki for a
block without that context and
> backstory. That's not exactly the standard here, but ... would someone
> just answer the question? What happened leading up to this to justify
the
> block? If it's that well known, you can
document it.
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:18 AM, Adam Wight <awight(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
>
> > Hi Petr,
> >
> > Nobody is language policing, this is about preventing abusive behavior
> and
> > creating an inviting environment where volunteers and staff don't
have to
> > waste time with emotional processing of
traumatic interactions.
> >
> > I think we're after the same thing, that we want to keep our community
> > friendly and productive, so it's just a matter of agreeing on the
means
> to
> > accomplish this. I see the Code of Conduct Committee standing up to
the
> > nonsense and you see them as being
hostile, so our perspectives
diverge
> at
> > that point. I also see lots of people on this list standing up for
what
> > they think is right, and I'd love if
that energy could be organized
> better
> > so that we're not sniping at each other, but instead refining our
shared
> > statements of social values and finding
a way to encourage the good
while
> > more effectively addressing the worst in
us.
> >
> > This isn't coherent enough to share yet, but I'll try anyway—I've
been
> > thinking about how our high proportion of anarchic- and
> > libertarian-oriented individuals helped shape a culture which doesn't
> > handle "negative laws" [1] well. For example, the Code of Conduct is
> > mostly focused on "unacceptable behaviors", but perhaps we could
rewrite
> it
> > in the positive sense, as a set of shared responsibilities to support
> each
> > other and the less powerful person in any conflict. We have a duty to
> > speak up, a duty to keep abusers from their target, we own this social
> > space and have to maintain it together. If you see where I'm headed?
> > Rewriting the CoC in a positive rights framework is a daunting
project,
> but
> > it might be fun.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Adam
> >
> > [1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rights
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 9:36 AM Petr Bena <benapetr(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I am a bit late to the party, but do we seriously spend days
> > > discussing someone being banned from a bug tracker just for saying
> > > "WTF", having their original comment completely censored, so that
the
> > > community can't even make a
decision how bad it really was? Is that
> > > what we turned into? From highly skilled developers and some of best
> > > experts in the field to a bunch of language nazis?
> > >
> > > We have tens of thousands of open tasks to work on and instead of
> > > doing something useful we are wasting our time here. Really? Oh,
come
> > > on...
> > >
> > > We are open source developers. If you make Phabricator too hostile
to
> > > use it by setting up some
absolutely useless and annoying rules,
> > > people will just move to some other bug tracker, or decide to spend
> > > their free time on a different open source project. Most of us are
> > > volunteers, we don't get money for this.
> > >
> > > P.S. if all the effort we put into this gigantic thread was put into
> > > solving the original bug instead (yes it's a bug, not a feature) it
> > > would be already resolved. Instead we are mocking someone who was so
> > > desperate with the situation to use some swear words.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:06 AM, Yaron Koren <yaron57(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > Nuria Ruiz <nuria(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > > >> The CoC will prioritize the safety of the minority over the
comfort
> of
> > > the
> > > >> majority.
> > > >
> > > > This is an odd thing to say, in this context. I don't believe
> anyone's
> > > > safety is endangered by hearing the phrase in question, so it
seems
> > like
> > > > just an issue of comfort on both sides. And who are the minority
and
> > > > majority here?
> > > >
> > > >> The way the bug was closed might be incorrect (I personally as an
> > > engineer
> > > >> agree that closing it shows little understanding of how technical
> > teams
> > > do
> > > >> track bugs in phab, some improvements are in order here for sure)
> but
> > > the
> > > >> harsh interaction is just one out of many that have been out of
line
> > for
> > > >> while.
> > > >
> > > > This seems like the current argument - that it's not really about
the
> > use
> > > > of a phrase, it's about an alleged pattern of behavior by
MZMcBride.
What
> > this pattern is I don't know - the one example that was brought up
was
a
> > blog post he wrote six years ago, which caused someone else to say
> > something mean in the comments. (!) As others have pointed out,
there's a
> > lack of transparency here.
> >
> > -Yaron
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
--
-george william herbert
george.herbert(a)gmail.com
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 21:41:35 +0200
From: Amir Ladsgroup <ladsgroup(a)gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] My Phabricator account has been disabled
Message-ID:
<
CA+ttme3nYdXGbKG_esGovcaGGHEa4Yo6UGY07Qp9oScpn0W-BQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hey Petr,
We have discussed this before in the thread and I and several other people
said it's a straw man.
The problem is not the WTF or "What the fuck" and as I said before the mere
use of profanity is not forbidden by the CoC. What's forbidden is "Harming
the discussion or community with methods such as sustained disruption,
interruption, or blocking of community collaboration (i.e. trolling).".
[1] When someone does something in phabricator and you *just* comment
"WTF", you're not moving the discussion forward, you're not adding any
value, you're not saying what exactly is wrong or try to reach a consensus.
Compare this with later comments made, for example:
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T200742#4502463
I hope all of this helps for understanding what's wrong here.
[1]:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct
Best
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 9:29 PM Petr Bena <benapetr(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I am OK if people who are attacking others are
somehow informed that
this is not acceptable and taught how to properly behave, and if they
continue that, maybe some "preventive" actions could be taken, but is
that what really happened?
The comment by MZMcBride was censored, so almost nobody can really see
what it was and from almost all mails mentioning the content here it
appears he said "what the fuck" or WTF. I can't really think of any
language construct where this is so offensive it merits instant ban +
removal of content.
I don't think we need /any/ language policy in a bug tracker. If
someone says "this bug sucks old donkey's ****" it may sounds a bit
silly, but there isn't really any harm done. If you say "Jimbo, you
are a f**** retard, and all your code stinks" then that's a problem,
but I have serious doubts that's what happened. And the problem is not
a language, but personal attack itself.
If someone is causing problems LET THEM KNOW and talk to them. Banning
someone instantly is worst possible thing you can do. You may think
our community is large enough already so that we can set up this kind
of strict and annoying policies and rules, but I guarantee you, it's
not. We have so many open bugs in phabricator that every user could
take hundreds of them... We don't need to drive active developers away
by giving them bans that are hardly justified.
P.S. if someone saying "WTF" is really giving you creeps, I seriously
recommend you to try to develop a bit thicker skin, even if we build
an "Utopia" as someone mentioned here, it's gonna be practical for
interactions in real world, which is not always friendly and nice. And
randomly banning people just for saying WTF, with some cryptic
explanation, seems more 1984 style Dystopia to me...
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 4:08 PM, David Barratt <dbarratt(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
>
> Again, this isn't enwiki, but there would be a large mob gathering at
the
>> administrators' doorstep on enwiki for a block without that context
and
>> backstory.
>>
>
> That seems like really toxic behavior.
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 6:27 AM George Herbert <
george.herbert(a)gmail.com
wrote:
> I keep seeing "abusers" and I still haven't seen the evidence of the
> alleged long term abuse pattern.
>
> Again, this isn't enwiki, but there would be a large mob gathering at
the
>> administrators' doorstep on enwiki for a block without that context
and
>> backstory. That's not exactly the
standard here, but ... would
someone
> just
answer the question? What happened leading up to this to justify
the
> block? If it's that well known, you can
document it.
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:18 AM, Adam Wight <awight(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Petr,
>> >
>> > Nobody is language policing, this is about preventing abusive
behavior
> and
> > creating an inviting environment where volunteers and staff don't
have to
>> > waste time with emotional processing of traumatic interactions.
>> >
>> > I think we're after the same thing, that we want to keep our
community
> >> > friendly and productive, so it's just a matter of agreeing on the
> means
> >> to
> >> > accomplish this. I see the Code of Conduct Committee standing up to
> the
>
> > nonsense and you see them as being
hostile, so our perspectives
> diverge
> >> at
> >> > that point. I also see lots of people on this list standing up for
> what
> >> > they think is right, and I'd love if that energy could be
organized
> >> better
> >> > so that we're not sniping at each other, but instead refining our
> shared
>
> > statements of social values and
finding a way to encourage the good
> while
> >> > more effectively addressing the worst in us.
> >> >
> >> > This isn't coherent enough to share yet, but I'll try
anyway—I've
been
>> > thinking about how our high
proportion of anarchic- and
>> > libertarian-oriented individuals helped shape a culture which
doesn't
>> > handle "negative laws"
[1] well. For example, the Code of Conduct
is
> >
mostly focused on "unacceptable behaviors", but perhaps we could
rewrite
>> it
>> > in the positive sense, as a set of shared responsibilities to
support
>> each
>> > other and the less powerful person in any conflict. We have a duty
to
>> > speak up, a duty to keep abusers
from their target, we own this
social
>> > space and have to maintain it
together. If you see where I'm
headed?
> >
Rewriting the CoC in a positive rights framework is a daunting
project,
>> but
>> > it might be fun.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Adam
>> >
>> > [1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rights
>> >
>> > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 9:36 AM Petr Bena <benapetr(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> >
> > > I am a bit late to the party, but do we seriously spend days
> > > discussing someone being banned from a bug tracker just for saying
> > > "WTF", having their original comment completely censored, so that
the
>> > > community can't even make a decision how bad it really was? Is
that
>> > > what we turned into? From
highly skilled developers and some of
best
> >
> experts in the field to a bunch of language nazis?
> > >
> > > We have tens of thousands of open tasks to work on and instead of
> > > doing something useful we are wasting our time here. Really? Oh,
come
> > > on...
> > >
> > > We are open source developers. If you make Phabricator too hostile
to
>> > > use it by setting up some absolutely useless and annoying rules,
>> > > people will just move to some other bug tracker, or decide to
spend
>> > > their free time on a different
open source project. Most of us are
>> > > volunteers, we don't get money for this.
>> > >
>> > > P.S. if all the effort we put into this gigantic thread was put
into
>> > > solving the original bug
instead (yes it's a bug, not a feature)
it
>> > > would be already resolved.
Instead we are mocking someone who was
so
> >
> desperate with the situation to use some swear words.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:06 AM, Yaron Koren <yaron57(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > Nuria Ruiz <nuria(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > > >> The CoC will prioritize the safety of the minority over the
comfort
> of
> > > the
> > > >> majority.
> > > >
> > > > This is an odd thing to say, in this context. I don't believe
> anyone's
> > > > safety is endangered by hearing the phrase in question, so it
seems
> > like
> > > > just an issue of comfort on both sides. And who are the minority
and
>> > > > majority here?
>> > > >
>> > > >> The way the bug was closed might be incorrect (I personally
as
an
>> > > engineer
>> > > >> agree that closing it shows little understanding of how
technical
>> > teams
>> > > do
>> > > >> track bugs in phab, some improvements are in order here for
sure)
> but
> > > the
> > > >> harsh interaction is just one out of many that have been out of
line
>> > for
>> > > >> while.
>> > > >
>> > > > This seems like the current argument - that it's not really
about
the
> > use
> > > > of a phrase, it's about an alleged pattern of behavior by
MZMcBride.
>> > What
>> > > > this pattern is I don't know - the one example that was
brought
up
>> was
>> > a
>> > > > blog post he wrote six years ago, which caused someone else to
say
> > > something mean in the comments. (!) As
others have pointed out,
> there's a
> > > lack of transparency here.
> > >
> > > -Yaron
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > > Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
--
-george william herbert
george.herbert(a)gmail.com
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
------------------------------
End of Wikitech-l Digest, Vol 181, Issue 42
*******************************************