| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 54237
Location: 56N 3W
|
 Posted: Thu May 14, 2015 7:33 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
idella4 and hasufell,
You remind me of the story of the old bull and the young bull ...
I'm sure Google will find it if you don't know it.
_________________
Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
idella4
Retired Dev
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 1600
Location: Australia, Perth
|
| Posted: Fri May 15, 2015 4:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| NeddySeagoon wrote: | idella4 and hasufell,
You remind me of the story of the old bull and the young bull ...
I'm sure Google will find it if you don't know it. |
No need for gooling, I remember it when narrated to me by English brother in law when I was a young bull, around 1975, old bull
_________________
idella4@aus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Fri May 15, 2015 12:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| idella4 wrote: | | My reference to the light bulb still stands. Currently the chief protagonists have no belief they need change because they are just fine the way they are. |
++
No-one picks them up on it, so they think it's acceptable. The longer it goes on, the more complicit everyone else becomes (rationalised with the "accepted convention" that "we must be treated specially", ie: get away with what users never would, rather than be held to a higher standard.)
| Quote: | | What will they say when someone taps them on the shoulder and tells them they're actually not? |
"It's people like you who are the only problem we have. If only you'd STFU and take our crap with a smile, everything would be fine and dandy."
| Quote: | How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb?
A. 1. But the light bulb has to really want to change |
Lol; cognitive dissonance is a hard one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
idella4
Retired Dev
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 1600
Location: Australia, Perth
|
| Posted: Fri May 15, 2015 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| steveL wrote: | | No-one picks them up on it, so they think it's acceptable. The longer it goes on, the more complicit everyone else becomes (rationalised with the "accepted convention" that "we must be treated specially", ie: get away with what users never would, rather than be held to a higher standard.) |
I'm not convinced that devs really have the belief or attitude that they must be "treated specially". Certainly us devs ought be treated with a degree of decorum and respect. It's hard to argue against that fundamental standard. Rather, I have the impression that you are of the impression that devs can use their status as devs to kick and push users around at whim with utter impunity. Frankly I find this a very brave if not brazen stance, however I have been absent from mainstream gentoo forums for years I have to withdraw myself as a credible first hand witness as to whether such claims contain any merit. I can attest though to the merit of the the above up to and excluding (rationalised ....... )
The trends of inter dev rivalry and dissonance appear to have gained some momentum recently. The collateral damage from smug put downs, blatant insensitivity, rudeness and various displays of self importance appear to have become more acutely observed by devs themselves and draw significant displeasure and disapproval from at least some in high ranks, though the thread submitted by robbat2 was in fact spawned from outrageous offensiveness by a user or 2 towards dedicated infra members, attempting to preserve anonymity hiding behind cheap throw away emails address sources. (That didn't work well) Whether these will perpetually continue to fly under the radar is not clear at this point. Users certainly have not been given free passes.
| steveL wrote: | "It's people like you who are the only problem we have. If only you'd STFU and take our crap with a smile, everything would be fine and dandy."
|
Eeeer, this is I sincerely hope the use of hyperbole to communicate a point. Else it's an excuse to throw in rash accusations in a way that generalises the treatment of most any dev to most any user. In this light, this statement needs copious volumes of qualifying and provision of both context and vicarious examples.
The advice to hasufell equally applies to steveL. You could do well to attempt a more conciliatory tone.
| Quote: | How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb?
A. 1. But the light bulb has to really want to change |
glad you like that one.
_________________
idella4@aus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Fri May 15, 2015 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| steveL wrote: | | No-one picks them up on it, so they think it's acceptable. The longer it goes on, the more complicit everyone else becomes (rationalised with the "accepted convention" that "we must be treated specially", ie: get away with what users never would, rather than be held to a higher standard.) |
| idella4 wrote: | | I'm not convinced that devs really have the belief or attitude that they must be "treated specially". |
This goes back to an earlier discussion.
| Quote: | | Certainly us devs ought be treated with a degree of decorum and respect. It's hard to argue against that fundamental standard. |
The fact that someone has a "developer" badge is irrelevant to that though; which is where the problem lies.
In essence: if someone brings their status into a discussion about manners, they're already in the wrong.
It's just a question of how long it takes them to realise it, if at all; meanwhile everyone else has drawn their own conclusions.
| Quote: | | Rather, I have the impression that you are of the impression that devs can use their status as devs to kick and push users around at whim with utter impunity. Frankly I find this a very brave if not brazen stance, however I have been absent from mainstream gentoo forums for years I have to withdraw myself as a credible first hand witness as to whether such claims contain any merit. |
Well it's happened to me (and keeps on happening to me, despite my voluntary withdrawal from developer media), and over the last X years I've been around, I've seen it happen to others on countless occasions (that used to make me laugh at first, at the insipid arrogance on display) and many people have told me of their own personal experiences of exactly that, "off-list" ofc.
More common are the people on IRC who say they'd love to help Gentoo more, but turned down recruitment offers, because they don't want to be associated with the behaviour they see on display by the collective.
Unfortunately that never is listened to, except to argue for "more developers", which again would be risible if it weren't in earnest.
The usual response is to state that there'd be no problem if only we didn't say there was one. The self-delusion is strong in this subset.
It is seen as collective behaviour, because no-one says a damn word against another developer in public, at least not in the sense of a self-moderating community; only in ego-wars. (Contrast this with user forums, where exactly that, self-moderation, happens more often than admin intervention is required.)
Argumentation about it, rather than fessing up and making the changes required (internal at first, external later), only illustrates the problem more.
| Quote: | I can attest though to the merit of the the above up to and excluding (rationalised ....... )
The trends of inter dev rivalry and dissonance appear to have gained some momentum recently. The collateral damage from smug put downs, blatant insensitivity, rudeness and various displays of self importance appear to have become more acutely observed by devs themselves and draw significant displeasure and disapproval from at least some in high ranks |
You said it. We'll see if those "in high ranks" actually do anything about it in the media where it happens (which is the only way to deal with these kinds of issues, at least in the first instance. Anything else is a sham, ime.)
I note in passing that again this is about developers and their media.
Getting them to the standard of user forums and #gentoo-* was the whole point of the CoC.
| Quote: | | Eeeer, this is I sincerely hope the use of hyperbole to communicate a point. |
OFC it is.
| Quote: | | Else it's an excuse to throw in rash accusations in a way that generalises the treatment of most any dev to most any user. |
I have no idea what that means, but since the premise is false, let's forget it.
| Quote: | | In this light, this statement needs copious volumes of qualifying and provision of both context and vicarious examples. |
Or a modicum of intelligence on the part of the reader. Still there's some context linked above.
| Quote: | | You could do well to attempt a more conciliatory tone. |
I'm not going to avoid "negative descriptions" of bad behaviour, because that's the only sort there are.
Or you end up down the strong fertiliser road.
For the avoidance of doubt, I'll reiterate (yet again) that a subset is exactly that; not the whole, nor even the many on most occasions.
The problem is the tacit acceptance, and the desire to avoid "stepping on toes" by not standing for asshattery.
Again, for the avoidance of doubt, everyone has bad hair days; but then we're just on to the basics of moderation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
idella4
Retired Dev
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 1600
Location: Australia, Perth
|
| Posted: Sat May 16, 2015 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| steveL wrote: | | I have no idea what that means, but since the premise is false, let's forget it. |
It means you are otherwise rashly accusing most any and all devs of dumping malicious treatment upon most any user upon any encounter of them. Still a bit convoluted but that's what it means.
| steveL wrote: | | I'm not going to avoid "negative descriptions" of bad behaviour |
Instead you're going to persist in bad "negative descriptions" of bad behaviour
| steveL wrote: | | because that's the only sort there are |
Oh I get it: the only descriptions of bad behaviour are "negative" ones
It only took 10 re-reads
| steveL wrote: | | Or you end up down the strong fertiliser road. |
I have no idea what that means
| steveL wrote: | | For the avoidance of doubt, I'll reiterate (yet again) that a subset is exactly that; not the whole, |
The very fact that you felt compelled to append this qualifier is itself a frank admission to painting small and bleak portion of the whole picture. But then, not all have the time to plough through extended essays.
What I can say is that
1. you are very bitter because
2. you bear the scars from wounds of battle in the past with those of my ilk.
3. therefore your tone is somewhat understandably inflammatory. In irc its simply called flaming
4. you have not yet managed to come even close to employing a more conciliatory tone. But first you have to acquire the skillset to possess one
5. But then, so do many of my ilk.
_________________
idella4@aus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Sat May 16, 2015 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| idella4 wrote: | | It only took 10 re-reads |
Hmm. Not sure that's really making any point for you.
Anyhow glad you finally got it, though really it should have been reflected in the prior part of your post.
| steveL wrote: | | Or you end up down the strong fertiliser road. |
| Quote: | | I have no idea what that means |
Oh, sorry thought that had been discussed earlier, but it was in another thread.
| steveL wrote: | | For the avoidance of doubt, I'll reiterate (yet again) that a subset is exactly that; not the whole, |
| Quote: | | The very fact that you felt compelled to append this qualifier is itself a frank admission to painting small and bleak portion of the whole picture. But then, not all have the time to plough through extended essays. |
Nope; it's simply a reflection of the fact that miscomprehension of language has been used as a pretext to take inappropriate action against me. You know, that stuff you said you hadn't seen.
| Quote: | | What I can say is that |
I'll stop you right there as your premise is flawed again, much as your opening paragraph did not reflect actuality as you now comprehend it.
I don't accept your slipped-in accusation of "flaming" at all. I thought you'd understood that "negative descriptions of bad behaviour" are much like "negative descriptions of bad code"; nothing to get in a tizzy about.
If you can't call crap code, crap, you'll never get better at it, and nor will the product you deliver achieve half as much for its users as it might otherwise.
You'll simply get better at doublespeek and presenting plans based on a crock.
Applies to pretty much anything really; it's why ego detachment is so critical. You are not your work, your code, nor your statements.
As such, criticism of those, irrespective of whose output is under discussion, is not a personal attack; however much an apparatchik may pretend offence in order to advance their agenda.
Frankly the slipped-in accusation is quite bad form, afaic. But nothing to get offended about. After all, sh*t happens. ;) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
desultory
Bodhisattva
Joined: 04 Nov 2005
Posts: 9410
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Wed May 20, 2015 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| davidm wrote: | | You know, you'd think 99% of it could be handled by saying "don't be a jerk" and if three or more people say you are being a jerk, you probably are. |
++
At the very least, you need to stop posting, and take some time out for a while, as your point isn't getting across, and you likely need the timeout for your own sanity. ;)
A good general rule-of-thumb I found (eventually;), was firstly to read the list via a web interface, so that I'd only really be interested in responding to on-point technical discussions, and secondly to never post more than twice a day. So that by the time I'd responded to what interested me, I'd only have one post at most for any flamey threads, and usually something more interesting would have taken it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hasufell
Retired Dev
Joined: 29 Oct 2011
Posts: 429
|
| Posted: Sat May 23, 2015 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| idella4 wrote: | | That would take to my understanding a massive internal re-write of Gentoo infra, a new generation GELP39. |
Yes.
You cannot improve the social (and collaborative) situation of gentoo much with the current organizational structure. That is what I think. GLEP39 is old and it probably made sense at that time, but I think it's time to face it and move on.
Everything else I said are just examples. They are not necessarily experiences I made myself, but also things that happened on the ML/bugzilla. Everyone can see them.
I'm not going to respond to the "meta-talk" and the fairy tale references since I don't find any value in that. Apart from being annoying it's just derailing the topic further. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
| Posted: Sat May 23, 2015 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hasufell wrote: | | idella4 wrote: | | That would take to my understanding a massive internal re-write of Gentoo infra, a new generation GELP39. |
Yes.
You cannot improve the social (and collaborative) situation of gentoo much with the current organizational structure. That is what I think. GLEP39 is old and it probably made sense at that time, but I think it's time to face it and move on.
|
You know why you cannot lower any senators paid?
Because to lower senators paid you need a law ; and that law must be vote by senators...
You can rewrite your GLEP39 all you wish, it won't change a thing as long as GLEP39 is made and approve by devs only.
Like your senators... if one made that law, that law would lower their paid in part1 (you need to keep the illusion) to raise it to the same level in part8 (or even bigger)
And if your senator is foul (or fair or good) enough to not do part8 trick, other senators won't approve it, until some kind of part8 is there...
ps: in my country senators do vote law (it might not be the same in your, but that's why i assume senators are voting law). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hasufell
Retired Dev
Joined: 29 Oct 2011
Posts: 429
|
| Posted: Sat May 23, 2015 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| krinn wrote: | | hasufell wrote: | | idella4 wrote: | | That would take to my understanding a massive internal re-write of Gentoo infra, a new generation GELP39. |
Yes.
You cannot improve the social (and collaborative) situation of gentoo much with the current organizational structure. That is what I think. GLEP39 is old and it probably made sense at that time, but I think it's time to face it and move on.
|
You know why you cannot lower any senators paid?
Because to lower senators paid you need a law ; and that law must be vote by senators...
You can rewrite your GLEP39 all you wish, it won't change a thing as long as GLEP39 is made and approve by devs only. |
Yes. That's why I pointed out repeatedly that starting from scratch would be a sensible alternative.
But a reboot always means a lot of work and we have very few people who still have a lot of energy for gentoo. Even paid ones.
Still... if someone would come up with a good concept, people might join. The other possibility is to reboot gentoo in-place... but that will be difficult as you noticed, because we already have a political lock-down. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
| Posted: Sat May 23, 2015 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hasufell wrote: | | Yes. That's why I pointed out repeatedly that starting from scratch would be a sensible alternative. |
Is that redo from scratch the dev mantra???
You don't need to kill the senate or the gov or the democracy or anything to get back to rock throwing age to change senators paid.
You need a senator that would pass a law with part1 without the part8 in it, and however he will do, succeed in doing it without the famous part8.
That's why it was easier with a dictator at head, like Gentoo at start under drobbins. Now if really you cannot manage to get devs sanity, i think what replace the dictator should be the trustees ; and if devs really cannot manage to do a GLEP39 for the community (and the community isn't devs only), that GLEP39 should be the facto made for it by the trustees putting out the dev problem.
A "do yourself what needs to be done or it will be done but this time, you will have just no voice in making it". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| krinn wrote: | | Is that redo from scratch the dev mantra??? |
Geeks tend to prefer thinking about structures and charts, than social issues.
From what hasufell wrote in this thread, he wants moderation, but he cannot make the associated (rather minor) leap to acceptance that developers who are in the midst of "things that happened on the ML/bugzilla. Everyone can see them," are in fact the least-suited group of people in the distro to moderate anything. Practically by definition, the only thing they are selected for is technical ability with ebuilds.
| Quote: | | A "do yourself what needs to be done or it will be done but this time, you will have just no voice in making it". |
That starts to come across as threatening, and I don't think it'd be accurate either, since consensus implies at least the majority of developers agreeing on a way forward, or it won't fly in day-to-day practice.
OFC, that's what happened 6 or 7 years ago, with the original Community CoC.
For a cultural shift to happen, it has to be because developers realise that they simply do not like "things that happen", and that it is their own behaviour as a collective which they are talking about: nothing else.
Then they have to stand up and discuss it on the project ML, not the forums, and make it clear that they want an improvement, which they accept they self-evidently have not achieved by keeping it amongst themselves.
In essence they need to admit to themselves, as a collective, that they were wrong to go along with Gianelloni's rabble-rousing cry of "we don't need all these rules, do we boys?", and in fact they do need some sort of moderation, by skilled moderators, not self-appointed Napoleons. If we were talking legal work, I'm sure they'd be more than happy for someone else to do it.
When you have effective moderation happening, on the medium where the disputes arise as well as "off-list", and everyone both knows about it and accepts it as a necessity (as we do on the forums) then you lay the foundation for a self-policing community: because people know they will be backed-up when they point out something, and that their own manners in doing so will be under scrutiny.
Without it, you just have a free-for-all; combined with the mix of mostly frathouse-age males, this is "resolved" by status (and what looks like bullying) instead of reason.
It's fascinating to watch in a Lord of the Flies sort of way, but absolutely terrible from a business-process perspective.
Still, like idella4 pointed out, the lightbulbs have to want to change first; secondly they need to know their own limitations, or they'll never get it sorted out.
FWIW I agree it's not under the Council's remit, based on its "constitution" even though it has no legal existence, and defacto falls to Trustees, both to delegate and to serve as ultimate arbiter, since all Gentoo work is done in their name. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hasufell
Retired Dev
Joined: 29 Oct 2011
Posts: 429
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| krinn wrote: | | hasufell wrote: | | Yes. That's why I pointed out repeatedly that starting from scratch would be a sensible alternative. |
Is that redo from scratch the dev mantra??? |
I have no idea.
The reason I find this to be a sensible way is not just the social situation. It makes also sense on the technical level and will allow us to abandon legacy code and avoid design choices that turned out to be wrong. Currently, we cannot, because we are bound by PMS, the upgradepath and well, the whole tree.
| krinn wrote: | You don't need to kill the senate or the gov or the democracy or anything to get back to rock throwing age to change senators paid.
You need a senator that would pass a law with part1 without the part8 in it, and however he will do, succeed in doing it without the famous part8.
That's why it was easier with a dictator at head, like Gentoo at start under drobbins. Now if really you cannot manage to get devs sanity, i think what replace the dictator should be the trustees ; and if devs really cannot manage to do a GLEP39 for the community (and the community isn't devs only), that GLEP39 should be the facto made for it by the trustees putting out the dev problem.
A "do yourself what needs to be done or it will be done but this time, you will have just no voice in making it". |
This is all quite theoretical.
People don't even agree whether it is ALLOWED to change GLEP39 (or replace it), because GLEP39 is what constitutes the current project structure. I know this sounds silly, but if you want to do an in-place change, you first have to explain to those people why we CAN change GLEP39. That's the mindset you have to deal with, really. I am not kidding. This will just result in a 100-post long bikeshed thread on the ML and 80% of the devs will not participate.
Gentoo does not have a lot of enthusiasm any more. Still, there are some projects inside of gentoo that work rather well. And now you have to sell them why they have to leave that comfortable spot. I really don't know how.
IMO... if there will be a reboot, it will not be triggered by social or collaboration ideas, but because we managed to break our technology. The bus factor of our main tools (e.g. portage) is already quite high. But it could indeed go on indefinitely, I have no idea.
If you want a more community centered gentoo, I think that will stay wishful thinking. The community is rarely involved when it comes to new EAPI features, radical design choices or whatever. It's usually just the agenda of a few devs who have the time to do it. And that's it. The killer phrase is "well, anyone can write a GLEP"... and there you go. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hasufell wrote: | | If you want a more community centered gentoo, I think that will stay wishful thinking. The community is rarely involved when it comes to new EAPI features, radical design choices or whatever. |
Rarely would mean sometimes the community is query, when you query the community like 3 times in more than 10 years, i'm unsure you can use the word "rarely" when it should more be "an accident".
| hasufell wrote: | | It's usually just the agenda of a few devs who have the time to do it. And that's it. The killer phrase is "well, anyone can write a GLEP"... and there you go. |
| https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GLEP:1 wrote: | | For more mature, or finished GLEPs you may want to submit corrections to the Gentoo Linux bugzilla |
| Quote: | Any major updates to GLEPs (that is, those that change the content of the GLEP rather than just fixing typos or adding small clarifications) should be approved by the Gentoo Council before being committed.
|
Oh yes, of course, everyone can write a GLEP, but you must submit it to bugzilla, i wonder who rule bugzilla? A yes, my bad, the devs of course.
And the Council will approve it then, wonder who rule the Council? Oops, really have a shitty memory, of course Council is made with devs only.
So yes, everyone can write a GLEP, but it's also true for law, everyone can write a law... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My experience of Gentoo is totally community-oriented, so I don't recognise that characterisation.
Community != Users only, which is how hasufell appears to be using the term; for a start, the developer mailing-list is deliberately open to users precisely to get the input of a technically-savvy crowd, less caught-up in the day-to-day rigmarole.
For sure, EAPI changes are developer-focussed, since developers are the users of the ebuild/eclass API.
It would be weird in the extreme if it were any other way, and the mention of it doesn't reinforce any point that I can see wrt developer behaviour.
But then, deflection and talking about structures and "my latest idea" for how everyone else should be organised, is always much more fun than simply dealing with your own issues; especially if that involves facing up to them first. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hasufell
Retired Dev
Joined: 29 Oct 2011
Posts: 429
|
| Posted: Fri May 29, 2015 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| krinn wrote: | | hasufell wrote: | | If you want a more community centered gentoo, I think that will stay wishful thinking. The community is rarely involved when it comes to new EAPI features, radical design choices or whatever. |
Rarely would mean sometimes the community is query, when you query the community like 3 times in more than 10 years, i'm unsure you can use the word "rarely" when it should more be "an accident". |
I've sometimes asked the community about stuff on gentoo-users ML. Most of the time it rather confused people 
And then the only ambassador we have is iamben and I proposed him for council, but it wasn't allowed.
You can make your own conclusions about gentoos capacity for change... but that's why I am proposing what I am proposing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Sat May 30, 2015 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| hasufell wrote: | I've sometimes asked the community about stuff on gentoo-users ML. Most of the time it rather confused people :P
And then the only ambassador we have is iamben and I proposed him for council, but it wasn't allowed.
You can make your own conclusions about gentoos capacity for change... but that's why I am proposing what I am proposing. |
Yes: structures and "my latest idea" for how everyone else should be organised.
Though I cannot follow the reasoning laid out there; you asked the user ML for input, not the forums, which strikes me as shooting the enquiry in the foot before it's got out the door. Then your nomination for Council didn't get through.
HTF does that lead you to "let's reorganise everyone" in what I can only describe as a counter-productive method?
It certainly is not as much of a no-brainer as you make out, except in the negative sense perhaps. |
|
| 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 Chat
