| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:30 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| khayyam wrote: | | you're not "discoursing with other people" [...] ... what "discourse"? [...] like some kind of *real* dialogue [...] |
We're not having a discourse?
| khayyam wrote: | | being "constructive", and "motive to value creation" (sic), your agreeing to a statement made by me, and as I said you fail to respond to the substance of whats written [...] or (as in this case) subsequently change your mind on what it was you were *actually* agreeing about. |
It thinks about the substance of those questions that constructively respond to the surrounding substance that was written; and thus, I am awaiting a constructive response that addresses the substance of those questions.
Why are you avoiding the substance surrounding those questions as well as the questions themselves?
| khayyam wrote: | | In short, you were [post=7524334]eating a fish and saw ridiculousness ride by on a bike [...] pot calling kettle black [...] it won't wash. |
Yes, I see a fish, ridiculousness, a kettle and a kitchen sink; instead of answers to those questions.
Why do you bring up these matters that are unrelated to the substance surrounding those questions?
| NeddySeagoon wrote: | | Maybe we should just have a topic with a vote - all discussion forbidden. |
Voting to forbid all discussion seems detrimental to the entire forum; but I think this isn't what you meant, can you explain whether the vote is specified by "all discussion forbidden" or by something else?
| krinn wrote: | | What would the vote be "is TomWij a troll?", so case would be closed. |
That vote would be prohibited by the Gentoo Code of Conduct, besides the definition of a "troll" being unclear; so, that case would be rejected. What about the vote "Did the chicken exist before the egg?"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TomWij wrote: | | khayyam wrote: | | you're not "discoursing with other people" [...] ... what "discourse"? [...] like some kind of *real* dialogue [...] |
We're not having a discourse? |
Yes, I agree <= is that a discourse? I too can ignore the substance of what's said ...
| TomWij wrote: | | khayyam wrote: | | being "constructive", and "motive to value creation" (sic), your agreeing to a statement made by me, and as I said you fail to respond to the substance of whats written [...] or (as in this case) subsequently change your mind on what it was you were *actually* agreeing about. |
It thinks about the substance of those questions that constructively respond to the surrounding substance that was written; and thus, I am awaiting a constructive response that addresses the substance of those questions. |
... nonsense statement ... "It thinks about" ... your speaking in the third person now? ... "substance", "substance", "substance" ... just not the substance of what your quoting was in reference to.
| TomWij wrote: | | Why are you avoiding the substance surrounding those questions as well as the questions themselves? |
... diversion framed as a seemingly innocuous question.
| TomWij wrote: | | khayyam wrote: | | In short, you were eating a fish and saw ridiculousness ride by on a bike [...] pot calling kettle black [...] it won't wash. |
Yes, I see a fish, ridiculousness, a kettle and a kitchen sink; instead of answers to those questions. |
... shame you didn't see those in the reply you provided ... nice munging of the quote btw.
| TomWij wrote: | | Why do you bring up these matters that are unrelated to the substance surrounding those questions? |
... diversion framed as a seemingly innocuous question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| khayyam wrote: | Yes, I agree <= is that a discourse? I too can ignore the substance of what's said ...
[...]
... nonsense statement ... "It thinks about" ... your speaking in the third person now? ... "substance", "substance", "substance" ... just not the substance of what your quoting was in reference to.
[...]
... diversion framed as a seemingly innocuous question.
[...]
... shame you didn't see those in the reply you provided ... nice munging of the quote btw.
[...]
... diversion framed as a seemingly innocuous question. |
Thank you very much for your detailed insightful meta talk; it answers an earlier question, it is noted down for reconsideration, as well as planned to be used as an example to improve further discussion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TomWij wrote: | | Thank you very much for your detailed insightful meta talk; it answers an earlier question, it is noted down for reconsideration, as well as planned to be used as an example to improve further discussion. |
... sarcasm ... condescension ... subterfuge |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Time will tell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
desultory
Bodhisattva
Joined: 04 Nov 2005
Posts: 9410
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TomWij wrote: | | That vote would be prohibited by the Gentoo Code of Conduct, besides the definition of a "troll" being unclear; so, that case would be rejected. |
That is simply false. Even aside from the fact that the document which you cite bears an explicit definition of the term:
| Quote: | Unacceptable behaviour
...
- Flaming and trolling. What is trolling? You are deemed to be trolling if you make comments intended to provoke an angry response from others. What is flaming? Flaming is the act of sending or posting messages that are deliberately hostile and insulting.
|
Of late though, your flaming and trollish behavior has been far and away most prevalent in topics about your flaming and trollish behavior. Which seems curiously opposed to your previously stated concerns about topics discussing any conflicts with you being publicly visible. Still, it has hardly escaped notice that such behavior is also typical of your participation in discussions regarding systemd or related software.
Further, if you are going to refer others to the Code of Conduct it would behoove you to bear a few of its directives in mind when posting, in addition to that cited above.
| Quote: | Acceptable behaviour
Things that should be seen:
- Be courteous. Though respect is earned, it must start somewhere. Respect someones right for their own opinion and acknowledge that they do deserve a measure of politeness in your response.
...
- Respectfully disagree with or challenge other members. The operative word here is respectfully.
...
- Admit the possibility of fault and respect different point of views. Noone is perfect – you will get things wrong occasionally. Don't be afraid to admit this. Similarly, while something may seem perfectly obvious to you, others may see it differently.
- If you screw up, take responsibility for your actions.
...
Unacceptable behaviour
...
- Posting/participating only to incite drama or negativity rather than to tactfully share information.
...
- Being judgmental, mean-spirited or insulting. It is possible to respectfully challenge someone in a way that empowers without being judgemental.
|
Consider how your participation in general support topics tends to be well divorced from such concerns and how to further distance your posts from such concerns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
666threesixes666
Veteran
Joined: 31 May 2011
Posts: 1248
Location: 42.68n 85.41w
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 8:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Depends on your definition of "contributing" really, doesn't it? He's displayed the same arrogant superciliousness on the user mailing-list recently as well. The consistent theme is him, not anyone else; and always all he does is send reply after reply that indicates zero insight into his own behaviour.
And an insistence on "correct protocol" from everyone else, as well as simple hubris. He argues round and round in circles, then refers you back to a prior bulshytt answer, and alludes to vague threats of compliance action when you get fed up of him.
Practically the definition of a troll, IMO. Which is why he's been /ignore'd on IRC for the last few months; he does the same thing there, and abused willikins to get round /ignore, until I finally shouted at him to leave me alone in #-portage (note: I'd made it perfectly clear to him on several occasions I'd like him to leave me alone; an /ignore is a pretty direct indication of that as well.) So this kind of thing goes on in every medium and every forum he's used within Gentoo. He's very good at it too; thankfully we've been through this before as a Community. Just remember: you're not alone, as perusal of any of his mailing-list interactions will demonstrate.
@khayyam: Glad to read you'd studied Law. I read Law books, but don't study it in any formal sense. And yes, I can see the similarities too. ;)
btw 'bulshytt' is used with a very distinct meaning:
| Code: | Bulshytt: A technical term denoting speech (typically but not necessarily commercial or political) that employs euphemism, convenient vagueness, numbing repetition, and other such rhetorical subterfuges to create the impression that something has been said.
<Neal Stephenson, "Anathem"> |
I've described his posts as that before, and the more this situation goes on in different media, the more apposite it seems.
I've run out of "benefit of the doubt" to give him, and am left with the conclusion that either he's simply a politicking asshat, or has some sort of disorder just like McCreesh, whereby social cues have no meaning for him, and this is simply a game: other people's reactions are bemusing and amusing. Whatever his problem is, it's his, not anyone else's.
Reasonable allowances can be made (most of us have been called 'borderline autistic' before, as geeks), but only if the problem is acknowledged; without self-insight there's no hope of that at all, and I for one do not have the time to chase the tail of what appears nothing more than a jumped-up martinet who hasn't got a clue about the realities of software-development (but oh, so wants to be in charge, if only we'd explain everything to him after he's spent ten pages annoying everyone.) Just my opinion, as ever, and like all my opinions open to change over time. I just don't think there will be any, of any significance, at least not til he's past 30, so I'll just keep my distance unless he addresses me directly.
Oddly he's not taken me up on that so far; I do ofc reserve the right to LMAO at some of the stupidity I've read. Watching him disappear up the tail of his own self-delusion can be amusing; more often it's just sad, especially in the context of 20 posts or emails from frustrated users doing their level best to communicate with him openly and honestly, to maintain the atmosphere of the Gentoo user community which we all love (or we wouldn't have spent so much time here.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 8:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| desultory wrote: | | TomWij wrote: | | That vote would be prohibited by the Gentoo Code of Conduct, besides the definition of a "troll" being unclear; so, that case would be rejected. |
That is simply false. Even aside from the fact that the document which you cite bears an explicit definition of the term: [...] |
That vote would fall under "Posting/participating only to incite drama or negativity rather than to tactfully share information." and "Being judgmental, mean-spirited or insulting. [...]", but on the forums I perceive that the above definition of trolling as well as the Gentoo CoC might be unclear or unknown to others (thus it is mentioned as a beside); I have never intended to upset anyone, that's not what I am here for.
| desultory wrote: | | Of late though, your flaming and trollish behavior has been far and away most prevalent in topics about your flaming and trollish behavior. Which seems curiously opposed to your previously stated concerns about topics discussing any conflicts with you being publicly visible. Still, it has hardly escaped notice that such behavior is also typical of your participation in discussions regarding systemd or related software. |
These topics about behavior address me, which is why I participate here; and when such topic arises, these topics serve as constructive feedback and therefore I would like to:
1) know which of my posts address such behavior and why (to do something about something, but you need to know of that something first to do so),
2) come to a (dis)agreement about it (as people want something from me and/or there might be a misunderstanding),
3) get the topic to stop as its continuation does drag me down (even when unintended by others) and
4) now due to misunderstandings stop my participation myself in the reported topic and those of similar type (I don't know yet what they want, I'll just avoid them then).
If I were to "flame and troll" my posts would be more along the lines of extremely political newspeak, "F-you" and not asking for questions, facts and references to get to an understanding and (dis)agreement.
| desultory wrote: | Further, if you are going to refer others to the Code of Conduct it would behoove you to bear a few of its directives in mind when posting, in addition to that cited above.
| Quote: | Acceptable behaviour
Things that should be seen:
- Be courteous. Though respect is earned, it must start somewhere. Respect someones right for their own opinion and acknowledge that they do deserve a measure of politeness in your response.
- Respectfully disagree with or challenge other members. The operative word here is respectfully.
|
|
Yes, I am respectful to someone's opinion; given that I do my best to follow how to disagree to the letter.
| desultory wrote: | - Admit the possibility of fault and respect different point of views. Noone is perfect – you will get things wrong occasionally. Don't be afraid to admit this. Similarly, while something may seem perfectly obvious to you, others may see it differently.
- If you screw up, take responsibility for your actions.
|
Yes, that responsibility was admitted; I also admit that I don't see what I am doing wrong elsewhere, even if they might be wrong to others.
| desultory wrote: | Unacceptable behaviour
...
- Posting/participating only to incite drama or negativity rather than to tactfully share information.
...
- Being judgmental, mean-spirited or insulting. It is possible to respectfully challenge someone in a way that empowers without being judgemental.
|
Yes, the questions intend a respectful challenge to share information with each other; the questions don't carry drama, negativity, judgments, mean-spirit or insults.
| desultory wrote: | | Consider how your participation in general support topics tends to be well divorced from such concerns and how to further distance your posts from such concerns. |
And if that's the only way I can participate here, given I seem to step on people toes out of there but fail to obtain examples thereof;
then I'm willing to give in my ability to join these discussions and restrict myself to solely responding in support topics, which I've already been doing per the past days. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| steveL wrote: | | Depends on your definition of "contributing" really, doesn't it? He's displayed the same arrogant superciliousness on the user mailing-list recently as well. |
I've adapted to their request when multiple people have requested as such, given those multiple users demonstrated that the etiquette on that list is different than in other lists; what you perceive as arrogant superciliousness is an intention to avoid to be convinced by only one or two individuals, as if you believe every single individual you'll have a bag of all kinds of odd actions soon enough. Holding on to what is written down as policy and etiquette is a good way to make sure you do things right; if listening to only one or two individuals where, they could tell me to point a laser at car driver's eyes and claim it is totally fine to do so. However, that seems hardly acceptable by policy and etiquette. (But I don't mind if they want to continue to shine such lasers such way)
| steveL wrote: | | And an insistence on "correct protocol" from everyone else, as well as simple hubris. |
It is an opinion, not a decision; why do you see that opinion as insistence or a decision?
| steveL wrote: | | he does the same thing there, and abused willikins to get round /ignore, until I finally shouted at him to leave me alone in #-portage |
That was in response to your first note, I don't even know you had me on ignore; in a similar way, such first note addressed to WilliamH landed in the #-council channel.
| steveL wrote: | | (note: I'd made it perfectly clear to him on several occasions I'd like him to leave me alone; an /ignore is a pretty direct indication of that as well.) |
Yes, I'm fine with not addressing you per your request and with being ignored; however, if you then still continue to address me (like your first post to me in the systemd topic, as well as your first willikins note, ...), I can hardly prevent addressing you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Akkara
Bodhisattva
Joined: 28 Mar 2006
Posts: 6702
Location: &akkara
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TomWij wrote: | | [...] I also admit that I don't see what I am doing wrong elsewhere, even if they might be wrong to others. [...] |
It's hard to see one's own faults (and, apparently, *much* harder for some...)...
Can you accept the fact that you're annoying to others - even if you might not understand *how*, or *why*, or perhaps think that they shouldn't be feeling annoyed?
Here's a hint: you are being annoying to the aleph-1. Stop. Post your usual good direct technical support. Refrain from all other commentary until such a time as you DO gain this insight.
I'm finding it difficult to understand how all this meta^N discussion can hold the interest it does. It seems everyone's said their piece. And it's been rehashed so many times over it's fully atomized and would be down to quarks by now were it not for the strong force being so... strong.
_________________
Many think that Dilbert is a comic. Unfortunately it is a documentary. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 8:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Akkara wrote: | | TomWij wrote: | | [...] I also admit that I don't see what I am doing wrong elsewhere, even if they might be wrong to others. [...] |
Can you accept the fact that you're annoying to others - even if you might not understand *how*, or *why*, or perhaps think that they shouldn't be feeling annoyed? |
Not in that exact wording, as that would be admittance; but, I accept the fact that I am perceived as such - regardless of intention, understanding or thoughts.
| Akkara wrote: | | Refrain from all other commentary until such a time as you DO gain this insight. I'm finding it difficult to understand how all this meta^N discussion can hold the interest it does. It seems everyone's said their piece. And it's been rehashed so many times over it's fully atomized and would be down to quarks by now were it not for the strong force being so... strong. |
Yes, I will (and have stated to) refrain as such. There is still interest in this discussion as both sides want to see something out of this; on their part, well, I can't speak for them; on my part, gaining that insight per the questions asked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ulenrich
Veteran
Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1480
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 8:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 666threesixes666 wrote: | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_blaming
you know, that's funny i seem to remember tom wij contributing, and the others stirring the pot. |
+1 yes, it is (german) "widerlich"
I was bullied from the same small group of forum users a year ago. When I saw the forum admins don't help me I changed my behavior: I just don't answer attempts to provoke me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ulenrich wrote: | | 666threesixes666 wrote: | | you know, that's funny i seem to remember tom wij contributing, and the others stirring the pot. |
I was bullied from the same small group of forum users a year ago. When I saw the forum admins don't help me I changed my behavior: I just don't answer attempts to provoke me. |
And that's something I still need to learn to do; but learning that feels quite unnatural to do for some response that are perceived as a stronger provocation though I already ignore a large share of less strong provocations.
And why is that? I see it as disrespectful for me to not respond at all; while I may come over as an extrovert here, I'm an introvert IRL and that makes it struggling to make sure when I get out responses I get them right... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ulenrich
Veteran
Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1480
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 9:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TomWij wrote: | | ulenrich wrote: | | 666threesixes666 wrote: | | you know, that's funny i seem to remember tom wij contributing, and the others stirring the pot. |
I was bullied from the same small group of forum users a year ago. When I saw the forum admins don't help me I changed my behavior: I just don't answer attempts to provoke me. |
And that's something I still need to learn to do; but learning that feels quite unnatural to do for some response that are perceived as a stronger provocation though I already ignore a large share of less strong provocations.
And why is that? I see it as disrespectful for me to not respond at all; while I may come over as an extrovert here, I'm an introvert IRL and that makes it struggling to make sure when I get out responses I get them right... |
I saw you did not recognize my _invisible_ smileys some time. This assured me you are exactly that guy you describe here: A computer nerd 
Which is fine and results in enourmous productivity for the sake of Gentoo. But if there are emotions and religious like believes ....
I will try to abandon my invisible smileys in favor to act more courtously against you |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 9:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ulenrich wrote: | | I saw you did not recognize my _invisible_ smileys some time. |
Now I'm left to wonder what they were.
| ulenrich wrote: | | This assured me you are exactly that guy you describe here: A computer nerd |
Whoa?  No. I would like you to see me as a geek... 
| ulenrich wrote: | Which is fine and results in enourmous productivity for the sake of Gentoo of yours. But if there are emotions and religious like believes ....
I will try to abandon my invisible smileys in favor to act more courtously against you |
Thanks, I'll do the same.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anon-E-moose
Watchman
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 6097
Location: Dallas area
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Akkara wrote: | | And it's been rehashed so many times over it's fully atomized and would be down to quarks by now were it not for the strong force being so... strong. |
Thanks for the quote. I'm still lolling over it.
_________________
PRIME x570-pro, 3700x, 6.1 zen kernel
gcc 13, profile 17.0 (custom bare multilib), openrc, wayland |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aCOSwt
Bodhisattva
Joined: 19 Oct 2007
Posts: 2537
Location: Hilbert space
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Could you please ignore the badge I wear when reading this post. My contribution has got nothing to do with moderation and might not represent the opinion of the gentoo-forum's Mods/Admins taken as a whole.
Moreover, what I'll write hereafter is not an opinion. 
| Akkara wrote: | | It's hard to see one's own faults (and, apparently, *much* harder for some...) |
And even harder when... nobody can objectively be declared faulty.
| Akkara wrote: | | Can [one] accept the fact that [he's] annoying to others |
No, because... being annoyed is not a fact : It is an affect and no one has got the capability to realize other's affects.
Oh wait! Being annoyed is an affect but it does trigger a fact that just cannot be ignored : When one starts receiving rotten tomatoes at the end of a speech, then this is a fact that just cannot be ignored.
- This fact is unfair ? possibly! Only some true good friend could tell!
- This fact is wrongdoing ? possibly! Only some police can tell!
- This is unjust ? Nobody can tell! This *is* a fact! The speaker recieved rotten tomatoes period!
In such a situation, it can systematically be observed that, if the speaker then tries to :
- Claim how unfair it is, he will just increase the frequency of the beam! Why? Only because he his not a true good friend of those who throw tomatoes !
- Claim that throwing tomatoes is wrongdoing, he will just increase the frequency of the beam! Only because he does not belong to the police.
- Claim how unjust it is, he will just increase the frequency of the beam! Why ? Only because... nobody can tell that !
Also note that if the speaker explicitely accepts the fairness, the justice of the punishment, the effect of twicing the frequency of the beam will be identical.
Simply because, once again : He is not entitled to judge about this. The position held by the speaker does not entitle him to judge this.
The only possible attitude for the speaker is then : To withdraw ! I mean to withdraw himself and his feelings of unjustice alltogether.
If the speaker has got an honest will to progress, he must then try to understand the root cause for the beam.
And he will definitely not succeed if he persists looking for whatever justice. Proceeding that way, he will find nothing but : feelings ! Worse : Personal feelings !
He will succeed only if analyses the problem rationally: That is : from a fact, infer another fact.
In this case : I received rotten tomatoes <= My communication is wrong.
Yes! I know the word incorrect. I do mean wrong! Wrong because, from a communication standpoint, there are real faults! (There are actually two faults)
And the very first fault is : A positioning error.
That is to say when the speaker adopts some form of communication, some tone, some style that is just not in accordance with the status, the position, that the audience acknowledges the speaker actually holds.
Tom, this is a fact that, totally irrespective of the pertinence of their content, you have given to some of your contributions the style a rhetoric teacher would have given to the same contribution.
And fact is : You are not a rhetoric teacher! And... would you actually get that title, the audience of the gentoo-forums does not hold you as a rhetoric teacher : The audience of the gentoo-forums holds you as : A forum member. No more, no less!
Tom, this is a fact that, totally irrespective of the pertinence of their content, you have given to some of your contributions the style an advocate would have given to the same contribution.
And fact is : You are not an advocate! And... would you actually get that title, the audience of the gentoo-forums does not hold you as an advocate : The audience of the gentoo-forums holds you as : A forum member. No more, no less!
I easily write about you Tom and your contributions, I could have been even more easily highlighting my own faults :
As part of the reporting thread, I have been telling something to 666threesixes666 the way a moderator would have done. I was not a mod. 666threesixes666 (rightly) throws the rotten tomatoes asking me to mind my own business.
And... as part of this thread... well... I believe that I deserve rotten tomatoes as well for communicating like a communication teacher would when... I am actually not a communication teacher.
I said that they were actually 2 faults.
Ah, bha, this post is already tl;dr and the other fault concerns... the other members of the society...
Will later consider if I feel forced to add some additional chapter.
_________________
Last edited by aCOSwt on Fri Mar 28, 2014 11:09 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anon-E-moose
Watchman
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 6097
Location: Dallas area
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 11:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'll be serious for a moment then go back to lolling when I see funnies crop up 
The context that Akkara used faults in is correct usage, IMO, for faults in this case has to do with social interacting skills.
Whether those interacting are doing it with knowledge of their actions and thus doing it deliberately
or they're simply that unaware of their lack of social skills, would be hard for anyone to judge. So I'm not going to bother.
I think the advice of the the admins should be taken though.
Simply stop with back and forth, lack of new substance discussions.
At least re. this thread and associated dramas.
There are a few people and I won't name names, as I'll keep this generic, that seem to be engaging in what I call brinking,
ie getting as close to breaking the rules as possible without actually breaking them. In truth they may not break the letter
of the rules, but they indeed are bending the hell out of, if not breaking the rules in spirit.
Now back to the circus, and please more funnies as we already have a large enough herd of drama llamas. 
_________________
PRIME x570-pro, 3700x, 6.1 zen kernel
gcc 13, profile 17.0 (custom bare multilib), openrc, wayland |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aCOSwt
Bodhisattva
Joined: 19 Oct 2007
Posts: 2537
Location: Hilbert space
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Anon-E-moose wrote: | | The context that Akkara used faults in is correct usage |
Akkara posting and known as a Gentoo-Forum's admin is perfectly entitled to declare a particular behaviour faulty.
I was posting as a common member of the gentoo-forums. 
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anon-E-moose
Watchman
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 6097
Location: Dallas area
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 11:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| aCOSwt wrote: | | Anon-E-moose wrote: | | The context that Akkara used faults in is correct usage |
Akkara posting and known as a Gentoo-Forum's admin is perfectly entitled to declare a particular behaviour faulty.
I was posting as a common member of the gentoo-forums. |
My opinion has nothing to do with either of you being mods/admins, but just as neutral parties. Just folks, as they say.
Anyway...more funnies, dagnabbit
Edit to add: Have you heard the one where an admin, a mod and an irishman walk into a bar.... 
_________________
PRIME x570-pro, 3700x, 6.1 zen kernel
gcc 13, profile 17.0 (custom bare multilib), openrc, wayland |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| aCOSwt wrote: | Tom, this is a fact that, totally irrespective of the pertinence of their content, you have given to some of your contributions the style a rhetoric teacher would have given to the same contribution.
Tom, this is a fact that, totally irrespective of the pertinence of their content, you have given to some of your contributions the style an advocate would have given to the same contribution. |
When reading this  , I think "where? why? how?" ; and if I were to ask that, which I for once won't  , I can see your point about justice in the context of having a right (but not necessarily correct) understanding . So, instead , I can check my future posts against what I am told ; hoping they won't trigger that same thing , but that'll be a longer learning process...  learning it the long and hard way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aCOSwt
Bodhisattva
Joined: 19 Oct 2007
Posts: 2537
Location: Hilbert space
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TomWij wrote: | | learning it the long and hard way. |
I make absolutely no doubt about that.
Oh... wait... this way is shorter and easier when who honestly learns also accepts the idea of being taught... acceptance representing in itself an even longer and harder way.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6051
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That is still working on the supposition that your behaviour alone is the one that is unexceptable
_________________
| Quote: | | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 12:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aCOSwt wrote: | | Oh... wait... this way is shorter and easier when who honestly learns also accepts the idea of being taught... acceptance representing in itself an even longer and harder way. |
We're close to entering the realms of meta-meta-talk...
| Naib wrote: | | That is still working on the supposition that your behaviour alone is the one that is unexceptable |
Right, I'm awaiting aCOSwt to write the second chapter; then I can try to add that to the summary. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Gentoo Forums Feedback
