[aur-general] About bullying in our community (Was: TU Application)
connor.behan at gmail.com
Tue Oct 30 17:53:43 UTC 2018
On 2018-10-30 01:23 PM, Adam Levy via aur-general wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 1:06 PM Daniel Capella <polycitizen at gmail.com>
>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 5:02 PM Adam Levy
>> <theadamlevy+archlinux at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Being curt and direct is against the code of conduct?
>>> It seems to me that these three rules in particular are relevant in this
>>> case and were not respected: "Respect other users", "Do not flame" and "Be responsible".
> The only rule there that strikes me as potentially having been violated is
> "respect other users". But I think that cuts both ways in this case to be
> perfectly honest. It could be argued that Konstantin did not respect the
> existing TUs initial responses to his questions. But that's debatable.
> The main point that I am interested in making is that this initial claim of
> bullying and violent communication was overblown and inaccurate.
Hot-button words like "bullying" and "violence" are being used as a
However, I think the initial accusation of "whining" and telling
"bald-faced lies" was also inappropriate. An average AUR packager might
not realize that TUs routinely take over packages made by others and
move them to [community]. Claiming that a package "is broken" instead of
"causes orphan dependencies" also sounds like an honest mistake. And I
can't blame a user for not knowing enough about the bug wrangler's
workflow to tell which mailing list actions will make a difference.
In theory, this can be resolved with an RTFM. But when this realization
means that one will have to completely change his approach to developing
and packaging software for a larger community, some frustration is
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the aur-general