Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Society of Ouroboros Meeting (n+1)
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Forums Feedback
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
krinn
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 4399

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 12:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Akkara wrote:
I'm finding it difficult to understand how all this meta^N discussion can hold the interest it does.


Well, if a user is saying something wrong on a subject, and i care about the subject, i try to show him his error.
If he insist in his error. I generally just give up, i tried show him my point and why i think he isn't right, if he cannot understand it, i may try to make myself clearer. But as soon as i see he understand it, but still doesn't change his mind, i just give up.

But TomWij isn't a user ; TomWij is a gentoo dev. I just cannot give up, as his words are too powerful over any user reading him. So the "give up" cannot be apply with him.
I consider any user not aware of something, would just read my arguments and his, if the user is a little concern about who is right, that user might go a little deeper to find who is wrong or right. But it is a "not real", but in my mind, clearly "a real" fact that if a user is a little concern about who is right, he might assume a gentoo dev speech is the one that prevail, and doesn't need this time to go a bit deeper to consider who is right or wrong.
So anyone saying lie have no effect for me, but any gentoo dev spreading fud and lie have a high impact on their spreading.

Here are sample for me (but everyone knows many users have seen similar action from TomWij) :
me : http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7519010.html#7519010
Quote:
Having a stage3 with systemd is against Gentoo project itself : http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Base
Citation:
The Base System Project provides an umbrella project for keeping the system tools, libraries, compilers and layout consistent for all the various architectures under Gentoo Linux.
Re-put that on table once systemd is running on all arch.


answer : http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7519258.html#7519258
Quote:
That is the Gentoo Base System project; even under the assumption that this page is the Gentoo project, you'll note that this page describes an aim and/or attempt which leaves for freedom in which extent it is done.

The aim is clear
Quote:
provide a consistency in compilers, toolchains, filesystem layouts and startup scripts across all the architectures which Gentoo Linux supports

The only freedom given is :
Quote:
The relevant categories in portage with which we are concerned are sys-apps , sys-boot , sys-devel , sys-fs , and sys-libs . However, we do not hold exclusive jurisdiction over any of the categories.


So for me, i have 0 doubt this is a lie, a lie that would spread doubt over any user that would think "yes, gentoo doesn't care about having a tool that is not portable over all its supported arch set as default ; and so systemd is a valid candidate that doesn't go against Gentoo".

Here's another shame example :
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7480288.html#7480288
Shum user :
Quote:
I'm wondering whether the Gentoo devs have any plans to make it the default init system and replacement for OpenRC?

TomWij mistake, well nothing bad with that if you aren't aware of any :
Quote:
Are there Gentoo devs that have plans? Who knows, they haven't let heard of themselves if they are out there.

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7520818.html#7520818
me: providing a link to 1/ upstream statement 2/ TomWij quote BUT 3/ Pacho Ramos quote that show he have asked for it

TomWij :
Quote:
Where is this stated? The quotes tell something different:


At this point, i have :
- I still have a doubt if TomWij was aware of it or not at first. And could assume he was.
- No more doubt he is now aware of it (assuming he have read Pacho Ramos's quote, and if he didn't, this won't change my pov)
== What appears to be a mistake at first is now clearly a lie. Something done by someone with the Gentoo dev tag.

It's something aCOSwt need to learn too :)
You can remove your badge and claiming what you wish, even without it, you will remain tagged.
If i go nude jumping mad and shaking hands with redhat flag yelling "Long live redhat". I will have problem with police. And redhat don't care i'm just another silly guy.

If LP go nude without any flags, not jumping and not yelling, he will have problem with police too.
But sure he will have problem with redhat too ! Even he would argue he didn't claim to be from redhat and wasn't representing redhat, he was. And he would had put shame on redhat and redhat would have react to that.

Just like TomWij bad behavior is putting shame and lame on Gentoo itself : it's not acceptable, google and other bots keep recording how a Gentoo dev is pointed out by Gentoo users, how users point out clearly he is lying and attempting at spreading doubt. How many users point that such attitude is named trolling. Nobody wish other distro speaking about Gentoo with a : "bah Gentoo devs are just trolls".
It must be kept in mind : nobody cares if Krinn is an asshole, Krinn is not a Gentoo dev.

So, what is acceptable (you don't agree, but accept to leave it said as-is) from a user, is not from a Gentoo dev. I don't check if there's a Gentoo dev CoC, but i'm sure if one exists : (put peter parker's grandpa quote here).

So, this is why i don't find difficult to understand why all this meta are kept hot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 4185
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 12:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think anyone is saying such discussions when faced with factually incorrect statements should stop, but what is ... Dissapointing is the manner some perpetuate the discussion with ever increasing levels of vitriol and personal attacks while still stating essentially the same thing instead of sticking to attacking the post (not the poster) and rewording to manage the obvious misunderstanding while minimising the blatent misrepresentations who's only perpose appear to be some misplaced oneupmanship

All I can do is laugh at the behaviour of a couple of cliques that have formed in the 4+ threads that have been locked since if even 1% was pulled in the real world, especially to the French, the results would be ... Amusing to those watching, depremental to the children that attempted it
_________________
A free press is the unsleeping guardian of every other right that free men prize; it is the most dangerous foe of tyranny. Where men have the habit of liberty, the Press will continue to be the vigilant guardian of the rights of the ordinary citizen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aCOSwt
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 19 Oct 2007
Posts: 2537
Location: Hilbert space

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TomWij wrote:
Right, I'm awaiting aCOSwt to write the second chapter;

aCOSwt wrote:
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.

Well... the second fault, from a pure communication standpoint, appears when one makes explicit what should have remained part of the implicit content of his speech.
An example ? (amongst many)
Naib wrote:
especially to the French
:wink:
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aCOSwt
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 19 Oct 2007
Posts: 2537
Location: Hilbert space

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

krinn wrote:
Akkara wrote:
I'm finding it difficult to understand how all this meta^N discussion can hold the interest it does.

...
So, this is why i don't find difficult to understand why all this meta are kept hot.

No one should be mistaken about this.
This discussion holds actually very poor interest : Simply consider the very low views/replies ratio, mathematical evidence of the fact that only those actively participating to this thread are watching it... (fortunately)
If we even take into account those forced to watch this thread for moderation purposes, the true ratio is even lower.
krinn wrote:
It's something aCOSwt need to learn too :)
You can remove your badge and claiming what you wish, even without it, you will remain tagged.

I am well aware of the reality of... that illusion.
And that is why I am militantly in favour of a badge-less / tag-less / rank-less / post-count-less forum.

BTW, this illusion only serves when having to weight opinions.
What I wrote earlier were *not* opinions. :twisted:
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomWij
Developer
Developer


Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 2:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

krinn wrote:
me : http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7519010.html#7519010
Quote:
Having a stage3 with systemd is against Gentoo project itself : http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Base
Citation:
The Base System Project provides an umbrella project for keeping the system tools, libraries, compilers and layout consistent for all the various architectures under Gentoo Linux.
Re-put that on table once systemd is running on all arch.


answer : http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7519258.html#7519258
Quote:
That is the Gentoo Base System project; even under the assumption that this page is the Gentoo project, you'll note that this page describes an aim and/or attempt which leaves for freedom in which extent it is done.

The aim is clear
Quote:
provide a consistency in compilers, toolchains, filesystem layouts and startup scripts across all the architectures which Gentoo Linux supports

The only freedom given is :
Quote:
The relevant categories in portage with which we are concerned are sys-apps , sys-boot , sys-devel , sys-fs , and sys-libs . However, we do not hold exclusive jurisdiction over any of the categories.


So for me, i have 0 doubt this is a lie, a lie that would spread doubt over any user that would think "yes, gentoo doesn't care about having a tool that is not portable over all its supported arch set as default ; and so systemd is a valid candidate that doesn't go against Gentoo".


The particular aim quote reads "in compilers, [...]" and doesn't read "in all compilers, [...]"; this gives a freedom in this sense, as it goes as far as the packages they mark as being maintained by them, not that they are forced to guarantee this for the whole tree. A systemd stage3 can have involvement from the base system, but doesn't have to; it's only when the base system is interested in helping out, that they would be involved. Otherwise, policies would read that "compilers, [...] MUST be consistent with all the archictectures which Gentoo Linux supports"; as that would be a rule. Regardless of that being the truth or a lie; the end result will be based on the truth regardless of whether we convince each other of it being true or false, if there's a rule holding them from doing so there wouldn't be a systemd stage3 and if there weren't a rule holding them from doing so there would be the possibility for a systemd stage3 to be created.

On a side note; please note that anyone can start a project (even a conflicting one!) and that words on a particular project page do not necessarily reflect the position of Gentoo as a whole, see developer hierarchy and GLEP 39: An "old-school" metastructure proposal with "boot for being a slacker" for the details on this.

What I wrote above does not indicate "gentoo doesn't care about having a tool that is not portable over all its supported arch set as default"; all it does, is indicate a systemd stage3 can be there side-by-side, such that an either choice can remain without either choice becoming the default. It is not saying that an systemd stage3 would replace an OpenRC stage3 or the other way around; why should they, when Gentoo can provide choice instead? That Gentoo cares about choice doesn't imply that Gentoo doesn't care about that user's doubt. I do care about that user's doubt in the way that I don't want to see defaults enforced on anyone. And thus, if there were to be a systemd stage3; then, I'd prefer that to be a separate stage3 than for it to replace the existing stage3.

krinn wrote:
Here's another shame example :
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7480288.html#7480288
Shum user :
Quote:
I'm wondering whether the Gentoo devs have any plans to make it the default init system and replacement for OpenRC?

TomWij mistake, well nothing bad with that if you aren't aware of any :
Quote:
Are there Gentoo devs that have plans? Who knows, they haven't let heard of themselves if they are out there.

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7520818.html#7520818
me: providing a link to 1/ upstream statement 2/ TomWij quote BUT 3/ Pacho Ramos quote that show he have asked for it

TomWij :
Quote:
Where is this stated? The quotes tell something different:


At this point, i have :
- I still have a doubt if TomWij was aware of it or not at first. And could assume he was.
- No more doubt he is now aware of it (assuming he have read Pacho Ramos's quote, and if he didn't, this won't change my pov)
== What appears to be a mistake at first is now clearly a lie. Something done by someone with the Gentoo dev tag.


The user asks about the plans of "Gentoo" devs here; you then start by quoting LP, therefore I point out the difference between Gentoo's and upstream's position on this. At the very first read of your post I know the latter quote is of Pacho; what you perceive as an answer to the last quote is rather intended to answer the first quotes. But even if we do take Pacho into consideration; if Pacho wants to wave a flag, a higher instance in Gentoo could still take that flag away from him to stop the association between Gentoo and that flag waving.

krinn wrote:
Just like TomWij bad behavior is putting shame and lame on Gentoo itself : it's not acceptable, google and other bots keep recording how a Gentoo dev is pointed out by Gentoo users, how users point out clearly he is lying and attempting at spreading doubt.


I don't see what's unacceptable about basing myself on the Gentoo metastructure in my writings, as well as to answering Shum's question "I'm wondering whether the Gentoo devs have any plans to make it the default init system and replacement for OpenRC?" in the context of Gentoo instead of upstream; doubts can be answered by asking questions, those doubts aren't direct results of my writing but rather indirect results by prejudgments that I cannot be aware of in advance.

krinn wrote:
How many users point that such attitude is named trolling. Nobody wish other distro speaking about Gentoo with a : "bah Gentoo devs are just trolls".
It must be kept in mind : nobody cares if Krinn is an asshole, Krinn is not a Gentoo dev. So, what is acceptable (you don't agree, but accept to leave it said as-is) from a user, is not from a Gentoo dev. I don't check if there's a Gentoo dev CoC, but i'm sure if one exists : (put peter parker's grandpa quote here).

So, this is why i don't find difficult to understand why all this meta are kept hot.


Gentoo isn't just perceived by its developers; it extends to its community, that includes its users. Most contact between Gentoo users happens on chat and forums; which, as you can see, don't usually involve much Gentoo developers. On at least a weekly basis, I catch someone from another distro saying somewhere "Sorry that I ask [other distro] question here, but the users of [other distro] in the [other distro] {channel,forum,...} are [expletive]. Maybe I'll switch to Gentoo, you guys are [euphemism]."; and in the very same way, Gentoo could be losing users as well. We're hold on to the same actions and results. There is no separate CoC or separate social contract; what is keeping the meta hot here, is that what we discuss here matters for the both of us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 2247

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 11:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TomWij wrote:
[...] and in the very same way, Gentoo could be losing users as well. We're h[e]ld [...] to the same actions and results. There is no separate CoC or separate social contract; what is keeping the meta hot here, is that what we discuss here matters for the both of us.

I agree on the general gist of that statement, certainly the "for both of us" and the extent to which any social contract applies, its universality so to speak.

Anyhow, having been interrupted on more pressing problems IRL not some 24hr ago, and pacing the floors of a hospital with all manner of thoughts in my head, I return to find the recent spurt of posts ... and in all honesty its *too much*. Not, I think, because of some shadow cast by the possibility of loosing someone close to me, no, its something more fundamental than that, and it probably would have hit me had this recent cloud not been cast. Its "too much" because the cost/benefit is weighing in favour of not saying any more ... throwing in the towel and saying "to hell with it".

I made the foolish mistake of mentioning *one* fact from my private life and ding-dong this thing I call "discourse" is the trial of TomWij (... and not the "Society of Ouroboros Meeting (n+1)" that some clever soul thought to call it). Note the various references to "judges", "the accused", "judge not [...]", "victim blaming" and other subtle, or not so subtle, attempts at a troll subsequent to that mention. I had put these aside as the idea of tag teaming all comers was not something I look on gleefully (contrary to some peoples perception). Since then various other, for me at least, more distressful ideas have entered the frey, "cliques" delineated, and the reckoning of this "trial" as the chance to settle old scores, score points in a game of perpetuated "oneupmanship", or drag out this or that point made in some other thread. Similarly, its importance (or not) is whether it is of "interest" ... quizzically difficult to be understood ... or measure by "ratio". Why does any of this bother me? Well, because the extent of it ... again, the cost/benefit of making the effort to respond to each and every point seems to outweigh any benefit I might gain.

I'll be perfectly clear, I challenged Tom on every point I did because I believe it to be important, not because he's "Tom, gentoo developer ... pain in the neck ... liar (and for the record I never insinuated this was the case)", or because there are others taking an "interest", or to fulfil the requirements of some "clique", etc, etc. I regard argumentation and the care [taken] when it comes to the substance of what others write, etc, as central to our ability to manage our relations. I don't care who or what Tom is, what he represents, or what agenda he may or may not have, I care deeply about how people communicate. In Tom's case its atrocious, and I endeavoured to make that *absolutely* clear ... even to the point of being nothing less than abrupt with him. The habit of sophism is equally atrocious, mainly because its one of those habits that once established is particularly hard to break.

There is a famous piece of apocrypha: a Greek goes to a sophist (who at the time were "guns for hire" of the legal profession) and asks that the sophist represent him, the sophist agrees (for a price) and tells the Greek to come back the next day and he will have prepared the case for court. The next day the Greek arrives at the home of the sophist and knocks on the door, the sophist answers the door and immediately presents a 20 minutes speech on his clients innocence, how he was in Crete at the time of the incident, etc, etc. The Greek taken aback says "that was great, I'm sure we'll have no trouble in court" and leaves. On the way home he's going over everything the sophist had presented and with each step his surety on the outcome of the case is seeping away and by the time he reaches his house he is so incensed he decides to turn around and return to the sophists house to confront him. Arriving at the sophists house he says "everything you presented to me in my defence was false, a subtle trick of words", and the sophist says "I wouldn't worry about it, you only have to present it once in court" ... that's the reality, and danger, of sophism.

Anyhow, right now, none of that matters, I simply don't have the energy required to function in this current community ... but as Don Quixote perfectly expresses ... there are such things as windmills.

So, *too much* ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ulenrich
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1167

PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2014 12:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

@krinn,
first of all thank you for making this thread a real meta issue. What was pure mind fucking in sado-maso porn style, can now be discussed.

I will show that you shortened a quote in a way resulting in a lie for all users not reading the original post of Pacho in the bug:
krinn wrote:

...
Here's another shame example :
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7480288.html#7480288
Shum user :
Quote:
I'm wondering whether the Gentoo devs have any plans to make it the default init system and replacement for OpenRC?

TomWij mistake, well nothing bad with that if you aren't aware of any :
Quote:
Are there Gentoo devs that have plans? Who knows, they haven't let heard of themselves if they are out there.

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7520818.html#7520818
me: providing a link to 1/ upstream statement 2/ TomWij quote BUT 3/ Pacho Ramos quote that show he have asked for it

TomWij :
Quote:
Where is this stated? The quotes tell something different:


At this point, i have :
- I still have a doubt if TomWij was aware of it or not at first. And could assume he was.
- No more doubt he is now aware of it (assuming he have read Pacho Ramos's quote, and if he didn't, this won't change my pov)
== What appears to be a mistake at first is now clearly a lie. Something done by someone with the Gentoo dev tag.
...

@Krinn, you shortened the quote of Pacho Ramos at
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7520818.html#7520818
krinn wrote:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=482702 wrote:
The suggestion would be to offer some stage3 tarballs using sys-apps/systemd as device manager provider instead of sys-fs/udev. Even, in the future, this could replace current stage3


But Pacho Ramos fully said: Provide alternative stage3 tarballs using sys-apps/systemd
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=482702
Quote:
Pacho Ramos gentoo-dev 2013-08-27 18:27:15 UTC

Currently, people installing Gentoo at first time will need to use a stage3 using sys-fs/udev as device manager provider and, then, install sys-apps/systemd if they want to use that (either as device manager or to run all systemd parts). This is problematic as prevents us from setting "systemd" USE flag globally until sys-apps/systemd is not installing as, otherwise, people get a lot of blockers and circular dep issues that are hard to solve.

The suggestion would be to offer some stage3 tarballs using sys-apps/systemd as device manager provider instead of sys-fs/udev. Even, in the future, this could replace current stage3 as migration from sys-apps/systemd to sys-fs/udev is much easier (for people preferring it as device manager provider -> please remember that you can install sys-apps/systemd for device manager and keep using openrc), but last time we check looks like udev team wasn't ok with this approach. Then, the "provide as an alternative" would be enough :)

Thanks a lot

The half sentence of Pacho:
"Even, in the future, this could replace current stage3"
shows a cool developers kind of humour but not his intention if one reads the sentence further on.

Who lies ?
Who is to blame trolling ?
Who misleads the audience ?
_________________
fun2gen2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomWij
Developer
Developer


Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2014 1:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:
TomWij wrote:
[...] and in the very same way, Gentoo could be losing users as well. We're h[e]ld [...] to the same actions and results. There is no separate CoC or separate social contract; what is keeping the meta hot here, is that what we discuss here matters for the both of us.

I agree on the general gist of that statement, certainly the "for both of us" and the extent to which any social contract applies, its universality so to speak.


+1

khayyam wrote:
Anyhow, having been interrupted on more pressing problems IRL not some 24hr ago, and pacing the floors of a hospital with all manner of thoughts in my head, I return to find the recent spurt of posts ... and in all honesty its *too much*. Not, I think, because of some shadow cast by the possibility of loosing someone close to me, no, its something more fundamental than that, and it probably would have hit me had this recent cloud not been cast. Its "too much" because the cost/benefit is weighing in favour of not saying any more ... throwing in the towel and saying "to hell with it".


My sincere condolences; great that it was found on time, it is familiar.

khayyam wrote:
I made the foolish mistake of mentioning *one* fact from my private life and ding-dong this thing I call "discourse" is the trial of TomWij (... and not the "Society of Ouroboros Meeting (n+1)" that some clever soul thought to call it). Note the various references to "judges", "the accused", "judge not [...]", "victim blaming" and other subtle, or not so subtle, attempts at a troll subsequent to that mention. I had put these aside as the idea of tag teaming all comers was not something I look on gleefully (contrary to some peoples perception). Since then various other, for me at least, more distressful ideas have entered the frey, "cliques" delineated, and the reckoning of this "trial" as the chance to settle old scores, score points in a game of perpetuated "oneupmanship", or drag out this or that point made in some other thread. Similarly, its importance (or not) is whether it is of "interest" ... quizzically difficult to be understood ... or measure by "ratio". Why does any of this bother me? Well, because the extent of it ... again, the cost/benefit of making the effort to respond to each and every point seems to outweigh any benefit I might gain.


Your mention of it affects the way we communicate and/or perceive things, which I think happens in a good way making it a good thing; similar to how I as a computer geek/nerd have a different way of communicating and perceiving things, and knowing each others background can help with the way we communicate.

A recent example here in Belgium is that the king came to a television company; and in doing so, the television company knows they'll talk to the king so they need to have high standards of communication, similarly, the king knows they'll talk to a television company and/or maybe its viewers, so it has to adapt itself to talk on a more friendly kind of language to be understandable as to avoid more complex and/or political words and come over as part of the people.

Similar attempts to adapt to one another are seen in people meeting from different cultures; take for example, Obama tries to be respectful by bowing, adapting to the community, but in doing so he gets the angle in which he bows wrong; the Japanese emperor doesn't care, because he knows that Obama tries to bow to be respectful.

What I'm saying is ... if I have known earlier you had this education, as well as that most of your interest was in improving the communication; I wouldn't have had this windmill situation going on, which is the result of a misunderstanding, or even better would be to say it was the result of a self-deception. Such vague claims that were made here by the others about multiple individuals would be the result of the same; and as things become clear, the situation will improve. Regardless of what "cost" we put into this, even this very thread will yield a "benefit" for the both of us; whether that is improved discussion, reading, understanding, ... skills or something completely different. Writing this response, I know it is of a high cost for a low benefit; however, I think it is the best way to process this, as it makes us think it through, instead of reading it once and throwing it away.

khayyam wrote:
I'll be perfectly clear, I challenged Tom on every point I did because I believe it to be important, not because he's "Tom, gentoo developer ... pain in the neck ... liar (and for the record I never insinuated this was the case)", or because there are others taking an "interest", or to fulfil the requirements of some "clique", etc, etc. I regard argumentation and the care [taken] when it comes to the substance of what others write, etc, as central to our ability to manage our relations. I don't care who or what Tom is, what he represents, or what agenda he may or may not have, I care deeply about how people communicate. In Tom's case its atrocious, and I endeavoured to make that *absolutely* clear ... even to the point of being nothing less than abrupt with him. The habit of sophism is equally atrocious, mainly because its one of those habits that once established is particularly hard to break.


Thank you; the particular post linked to I think was made in a bad time of the emotional shock graph (which went down for several months), at which point I just want things to stop in public. It's the moment that I want actual examples of what is being spoken about and can't reasonably even (re)read or (re)think further than that in such situation.

You being abrupt in this case didn't work out well, thus I think that might have came at a bad time; which is why I think a more personal conversation (in PM) or a more direct conversation (on IRC) would have fit without the additional thoughts publicity and/or delay in posting carry. Take for example the one I had with saellaven. It would even go better IRL; as you know, seeing each other's emotions (like the joking use of smileys a few posts back) can help a lot...

khayyam wrote:
There is a famous piece of apocrypha: a Greek goes to a sophist (who at the time were "guns for hire" of the legal profession) and asks that the sophist represent him, the sophist agrees (for a price) and tells the Greek to come back the next day and he will have prepared the case for court. The next day the Greek arrives at the home of the sophist and knocks on the door, the sophist answers the door and immediately presents a 20 minutes speech on his clients innocence, how he was in Crete at the time of the incident, etc, etc. The Greek taken aback says "that was great, I'm sure we'll have no trouble in court" and leaves. On the way home he's going over everything the sophist had presented and with each step his surety on the outcome of the case is seeping away and by the time he reaches his house he is so incensed he decides to turn around and return to the sophists house to confront him. Arriving at the sophists house he says "everything you presented to me in my defence was false, a subtle trick of words", and the sophist says "I wouldn't worry about it, you only have to present it once in court" ... that's the reality, and danger, of sophism.


While I don't grasp the entire meaning of sophism; I'd like to note that, reading "Many sophists specialized in using the tools of philosophy and rhetoric" on its Wikipedia page, I should notice that I try to use such tools to improve my discussions (as with what any of us have been gone through; you know, there's always something you can improve).

For instance, there is http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html which I hold on too closely. Similarly, I recall others in the past doing this too; for instance, there is https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ some may or may not know about. And I recall having others elsewhere link to another such kind of site in the past. What I find about Paul Graham's "How to disagree" is that it addresses very well what you should do and what you should not do; however, if you take sites like Your Logical Fallacy Is, there's a particular thing I less like about this site and that is that it only addresses what you should not do, there's however no mention of how things should be done instead.

Which makes me a bit wary about such site; however, I think that avoiding each mentioned item might be one way to turn that site into something you should do, though ensuring you hold on to 24 things to avoid doing for every sentence (or perhaps paragraph) might be a bit too much work. This as well as other reasons makes me think that perfect discussion takes a long time to do as well as to master; and even when doing so, it would still depend on the other reader how the communication would go.

khayyam wrote:
Anyhow, right now, none of that matters, I simply don't have the energy required to function in this current community ... but as Don Quixote perfectly expresses ... there are such things as windmills.

So, *too much* ... khay


+1 Read up on a summary of that windmills story; and yes, I agree with the gist of that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
desultory
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 04 Nov 2005
Posts: 8029

PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2014 4:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TomWij wrote:
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.
It might be subject to that interpretation if there was sufficient context to indicate that a "no" vote was either not an option or was somehow considered irrational. Posed as a question, it should be taken as just that: asking the opinion of others with regard to whether the behavior of an individual is in fact trollish, the implication being that the poster of the question was not sure if such behavior qualified from the perspective of other users. Asking "is ${user} a troll?" is in itself no more forbidden by the Code of Conduct than asking other users what color they perceive the sky to be.
TomWij wrote:
Yes, I am respectful to someone's opinion; given that I do my best to follow how to disagree to the letter.
Perhaps too much so at times. One point where that guide is amusingly incorrect is when it dismisses tone as being nearly immaterial. The correct use and interpretation of tone is vital to clear communication, it is one of the leading indicators of when a discussion is starting to go wrong even when the disagreements are overtly still in the "better" ranges of counterarguments and refutations. Many people react adversely to degrading tone, or worse to initially abrasive tone, for exactly that reason, whether they realize it or not. Granted, things like fraternal ribbing tend to make this a bit more difficult for some to process, but reading the tone of a discussion to gauge how likely it is to be productive, or even merely avoid hostility, is a necessary skill for effective participation in more than a passing manner.

For example:
ulenrich wrote:
What was pure mind fucking in sado-maso porn style, can now be discussed.


TomWij wrote:
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.
It is perfectly natural, think of it as a social optimization: if someone it trying to get you to waste effort on conflict, either ignore them outright or pass it on to someone else to review and either respond to formally or dismiss as an over reaction.
TomWij wrote:
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...
Responding to everything is, in the end, a losing proposition regardless of how quickly and fluently one can respond. Worse still, attempting to respond to everything when dealing with sensitive topics tends to just serve to wear on the sensitive points leaving things worse than having no response at all. To strain the analogy further, some discussions need to be treated like wounds in that continuous coverage can be quite harmful whereas tending it carefully promotes healing.

khayyam wrote:
Anyhow, having been interrupted on more pressing problems IRL not some 24hr ago, and pacing the floors of a hospital with all manner of thoughts in my head, I return to find the recent spurt of posts ... and in all honesty its *too much*. Not, I think, because of some shadow cast by the possibility of loosing someone close to me, no, its something more fundamental than that, and it probably would have hit me had this recent cloud not been cast. Its "too much" because the cost/benefit is weighing in favour of not saying any more ... throwing in the towel and saying "to hell with it".
Nothing here is half so important. If it is bothering you, especially in such circumstances, it is probably best to leave it be until you feel ready to bother with it. Conversely, if it is a welcome distraction, you are more than welcome to it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 4399

PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2014 10:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ulenrich wrote:
But Pacho Ramos fully said: Provide alternative stage3 tarballs using sys-apps/systemd

No, he said
Quote:
Then, the "provide as an alternative" would be enough :)


Might be language difference, but in my own : then is showing : "if i can't get what i want, gives me that instead"

"provide as an alternative" is the second goal if the first cannot be met, so the main goal is "not provide as an alternative"... Use any words you wish that fulfil the "not provide as alternative" ; for me, i just read it as "provide as first choice". The poorest minded might also think main goal would be "do not provide it at all" (that is also valid as "don't provide it at all" is also contrary of the "provide as an alternative"). But it is totally clear he isn't trying to prevent a stage3 with systemd... And we don't need to guess anything there, he explicitly said it, and the only answer is "provide as only choice" as he ask to replace it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomWij
Developer
Developer


Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2014 11:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

krinn wrote:
ulenrich wrote:
But Pacho Ramos fully said: Provide alternative stage3 tarballs using sys-apps/systemd

No, he said
Quote:
Then, the "provide as an alternative" would be enough :)


Might be language difference, but in my own : then is showing : "if i can't get what i want, gives me that instead"

"provide as an alternative" is the second goal if the first cannot be met [...]


ulenrich brings forward the bug summary, thus it could also be perceived as the first goal; in which case "Even, in the future, this could replace" could suggest replacement as a second option to investigate. The word "even" could suggest it is a thought, the words "in the future" could suggest it to be looked into in the future and the word "could" is less decisive than the words "would", "should" or "must" and thus could suggest he doesn't actually want this but sees it as an edge case in the case that it is necessary.

We could summarize this as "Pacho wants an alternative stage3 and might try to replace the current stage3"; that is, it is definitely a doubt of concern, but whether it is seen as a plan could be up to the reader. Even if it were a plan of him, there are enough people to stand in the way to prevent it from happening; as well as an even larger group of people (of both developers and users) that'll be verbal about it, ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 4399

PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2014 12:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TomWij :

I'm unsure if there's a net etiquette, CoC, or any other document i could point you to to help you, but if you didn't notice i reply to ulenrich that has post something after you, well, it's not that i forget your post, it's because i INTENTIONALLY ignore you.
I could speak with someone that i still feel "fair" and "open to discussion", but for me, you're not such a person, just a troll.
I have nothing i could say to you that would clear anything, as i don't think you have a problem to understand anything (be happy! i don't think you're a dumbass), but i'm not into playing your words game.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomWij
Developer
Developer


Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2014 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

krinn wrote:
TomWij :

I'm unsure if there's a net etiquette, CoC, or any other document i could point you to to help you, but if you didn't notice i reply to ulenrich that has post something after you, well, it's not that i forget your post, it's because i INTENTIONALLY ignore you.
I could speak with someone that i still feel "fair" and "open to discussion", but for me, you're not such a person, just a troll.
I have nothing i could say to you that would clear anything, as i don't think you have a problem to understand anything (be happy! i don't think you're a dumbass), but i'm not into playing your words game.


+1 Yes, the reply is based on ulenrich's post; as that has given birth to that sub discussion. The words usage is an attempt to come at an agreement that favor neither side, as I would like to see ulenrich and you avoid going through this over a possible language difference and/or a statement that doesn't by itself change the future; what I stated makes neither ulenrich, you or me right about it, but leaves things up to the reader. There's no fairness, openness or word game playing involved here; I'm not trying to convince or troll you, I'm fine with being ignored by you... it should be noted that my words are also, or even more meant for ulenrich.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Forums Feedback All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Page 5 of 5

 
Jump to:  
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