/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2012/04/16/#ubuntu-us-oh.txt

BiosElement2exit02:04
BiosElement2Bleh02:04
BiosElement2Gotta love console lag02:04
canthus13Heh.02:04
BiosElement2I figured it was a lost cause. Gotta call Wow today and raise hell over there about this nonsense they call 'service'.02:05
BiosElement2*tomorrow02:05
Cheri703note: groove IP is pretty freaking cool02:27
Cheri703also, downloaded 12.04 beta and going to poke at it tonight02:27
Cheri703that's weird that an alternate of my ID would be attempting to sign in and out while I am also here >.>02:30
Cheri703not really sure what is going on there...02:30
canthus13odd.02:33
Cheri703yeah, disconcerting02:34
canthus13It appears to be your IP, though.02:37
Cheri703yeah, no idea why quassel would do that02:38
* canthus13 shrugs. dunno.02:38
canthus13You'd have loved the closing keynote speaker. It was supposed to be Ian what's-his-name, who started Debian, but he got the date wrong and didn't show, so we had Susan Stewart do an off-the-cuff talk on hacker culture.02:45
dzhoMurdock02:46
canthus13dzho: thanks. :)02:46
dzho:)02:46
dzhowe appreciate the report02:47
dzhosort of sad he didn't make it, he's from Indiana, i think.02:47
dzhoat least, went to purdue.02:47
canthus13dzho: he's supposed to record the talk and post it.02:47
yanoPaging Agent Muldor and Agent Scully.02:47
dzhowe want to believe, does that count?02:47
canthus13...and they're pretty sure they've got him locked in for the keynote at next year's ILF... which is kinda big since it's Debian's 20th anniversary.02:47
yanodzho: The Truth is out there.02:48
canthus13hmm.. here's the outline for her talk: http://www.binaryredneck.net/node/17302:50
Unit193X-Files. :D02:55
Cheri703it's back103:03
* yano runs and hides03:04
Cheri703!03:04
yano:-p03:04
canthus13Doppelgangers....03:04
Cheri703interesting ted talk I'm watching: http://www.ted.com/talks/sherry_turkle_alone_together.html03:05
Cheri703found it03:14
Cheri703had been using hdd from a different computer in main server, finally re-set up a proper one for the server, hadn't used other in weeks, turned on other comp tonight, forgot I hadn't fully removed everything I'd been using when it was in the server >.<03:14
canthus13Heh.03:20
canthus13Oops. :)03:20
canthus13Cheri703: You might find this fun... http://downlode.org/Etext/alicebob.html03:25
* Cheri703 bookmarks for later, am watching ted talks :)03:27
* canthus13 nods.03:28
Cheri703http://codeforamerica.org/03:42
Cheri703TED TALKS03:42
canthus13Heh.03:47
jandruskTED talks are interesting to say the least.12:06
Guest43802nick andygraybeal13:52
Guest43802awesome13:52
=== Guest43802 is now known as andygraybeal_
thafreakMorning sugar coated rabbit shaped marshmallows!14:18
jrgiffordjandrusk: most of the TED talks are pretty cool, but agreed.16:35
gilberthey all :)16:44
Unit193Hello gilbert.16:44
gilbertwhat up?16:44
Unit193http://fridge.ubuntu.com/2012/04/16/code-of-conduct-update/ Right...16:51
dzhoUnit193: Right?17:19
Unit193Left?17:19
Unit193cprofitt? Hello17:22
cprofitthey Unit19317:22
dzhoUnit193: I guess you won't be jumping up and down to offer your feedback on the CC, or what?17:24
Unit193Heh, I wouldn't be doing that anyway, but I read the reasoning for it and thought it was odd.17:26
cprofittwhat was odd Unit193 ?17:27
dzhotwo years, "many important discussions . . . since"17:31
Unit193Anywho, that's the link to it, that's the main thing.17:32
dzhoI guess how odd would depend on which discussions they're referring to.17:32
* dzho has never had any dealings with czajkowski17:32
Unit193I've seen her around, but not personally had to.17:33
cprofittyeah... I cam in on late, but I believe one of the issues was the leadership CoC was not signed17:33
Unit193Yep, the main CoC was the only one you could.17:33
cprofitthttps://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-community/+bug/39297617:34
cprofittI actually suggested that they remove the signature requirement and go to a checkbox17:35
cprofittthe signature is only as valid as the LP page anyway...17:35
cprofittsince there is no requirement that the GPG key has a certain level of validation in the web of trust17:35
Unit193Well, mine sure doesn't, but I can still use it.17:36
cprofittyep17:36
Unit193I've used it in emails before as well, just don't have a ton of extras.17:37
cprofittyeah... mine was relatively unsigned until this past UDS17:38
dzhoI think I still have a print out of your key, and that I need to sign it, cprofitt17:38
cprofittlol17:38
cprofittI think I have 15-30 signatures on mine now17:39
* dzho is more about the WoT than about any CoC17:39
cprofittincluding several Debian developers17:39
dzhoyeah, getting devs on a key brings it into the strongly connected set usually17:39
jrgiffordthe new CoC is... interesting.17:39
dzhojrgifford: "phenotype"17:40
jrgifford(won't say more than that, until I've figured out how to phrase it)17:40
dzhoI think that might have been a milk-up-the-nose moment for me17:40
cprofittthat part has been revised out, but the wrong revision is currently linked17:40
cprofitthere is a better view... with the most recent17:41
cprofitthttp://paste.ubuntu.com/932767/17:41
Unit193http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~dholbach/ubuntu-codeofconduct/v2-draft/view/head:/MergedCodeOfConduct.txt Right one?17:41
Unit193Gah.17:41
cprofittyeah... that one has the right verbage17:42
cprofittv22 did not17:42
cprofittthe Fridge Post has been fixed17:42
dzhov22 is the latest shown17:43
jrgiffordoh, agile. BUZZWORD BINGO17:43
jrgifford:P17:43
dzhohttp://bazaar.launchpad.net/~sabdfl/ubuntu-codeofconduct/v2-draft/files17:43
cprofittthe one Unit193 linked to is accurate17:43
cprofittmaybe the Fridge has not been fixed17:44
cprofittyeah... Fridge is still not correct17:45
cprofittthe only real change is the reduction of the phenotype stuff17:45
dzhooh, in dholbach's repo instead of sabdfl's17:47
cprofittyes17:48
cprofittI believe there is a merge proposal for sabdfl's that has not been approved yet17:48
Unit193Correct.17:48
dzhoanyway 'between' is for two things, 'among' is for several.17:49
* dzho files that right next to the 'less vs fewer' rant17:49
paultagsomeone should change sabdfl → sadfl :)17:50
cprofitthey paultag17:50
canthus13paultag: Makes sense.17:50
paultagcanthus13: I mean, after breaking Ubuntu really nasty-ly with an edict, it's not benevolent after a point17:51
paultaghi cprofitt17:51
jrgiffordcanthus13, paultag - i agree.17:52
paultagsuch a shame. Oh Ubuntu community, what has happened to you? :(17:52
canthus13paultag: You're right.  I still can't see what the point is of unity... aside from pointing out that the users are too stupid to be trusted with options. :/17:53
paultagcanthus13: when my Mother, a Sysadmin of more then 15 years, can't use Unity, it's a problem17:53
paultagnot to mention it crashes on me, is extremely buggy and hard to use17:53
Unit193They have options, they just can't pick what goes on.17:54
paultagI mean, pick two17:54
canthus13paultag: I'm sure I *could*, but I avoid it for the same reason that I avoid windows.17:54
paultagwhat a hunk of crap17:54
* canthus13 has already switched to Mint 12, and will likely change to Mint Debian once Gnome 3 is there.17:54
paultagDebian straight has been outstanding to me17:55
paultagit's like i"m using Ubuntu 9,x again, but with fresh software and sane defaults17:55
canthus13paultag: Mint comes with sane defaults.17:55
paultagFSVO sane17:55
* canthus13 nods.17:55
paultagthey fucked up the Fluxbox package on me and broke it for all Fluxbox users17:55
paultagincluding on their fluxbox respin17:56
canthus13paultag: Mint supports all my hardware OOB and just kinda works without a whole lot of futzing around.17:56
paultagsame here, but with Debian17:56
paultagI also use only thinkpads, which might help17:56
canthus13paultag: I'm sure broadcom chips are a bitch with debian still. :/17:57
paultagcanthus13: I've not had one in a while, I'm not sure.17:57
canthus13...Unless debian gave in and decided to make it easy to install Broadcom's closed-source drivers.17:57
canthus13Oh! Mint Debian has cinnamon now. :)17:58
paultagI mean, it's not going to be OOTB because debian doesn't support non-free or contrib (free software that depends on non-free) by default, given there's a commitment to free software17:58
canthus13right.17:58
paultagthat's part of the DFSG (it also states there will be support for it, but it makes it clear it's not official)17:59
canthus13With mint and ubuntu, you just install the non-free drivers with a couple of clicks.17:59
paultagUbuntu, on the other hand, requires you to use Nonfree software17:59
dzhorequires?17:59
paultaglike Ubuntu One (which I don't understand why it's called Ubuntu one, since it's neither community, nor free)17:59
* canthus13 shrugs.17:59
paultagdzho: the ubuntu-desktop defaults include it, all default installs have it17:59
paultagUbuntu One should be called Canonical One17:59
paultagor Nonfree-crap One18:00
dzhohaha18:00
paultagor Poor-man's-dropbox One18:00
dzhothe service is non-free, but the client is too?18:00
jrgiffordThe client is free, the service is not iirc.18:00
paultagthe client's free, but that's not the problem18:00
paultagall the data is locked up in a nonfree system18:00
paultagthat I can't even federate18:00
dzhowell, I don't use Ubuntu One, and have similar criticisms, but I'm not sure "requires" is the right word here.18:01
paultagwhat a crock18:01
dzhoo.O18:02
jrgiffordits part of the default install18:02
jrgiffordso you are forced to use it18:02
paultagdzho: not you, "Ubuntu" one18:02
dzhopaultag: haha18:02
paultagI object strongly to that name18:02
paultagsince it's not Ubuntu in any sense of the word18:02
* dzho nods18:02
dzhojrgifford: fsvo "use" I guess18:03
dzhoI don't use it, in any sense that I recognize the word "use" though.18:03
dzhoit's installed, yes.  Does one use something just because it's installed?  Also, again, the bit that's installed is not non-free, which I think we've established.18:03
dzhoI might even go so far as to call it *useless*18:04
dzhosince I don't use it18:04
jrgiffordI don't even use it.18:04
paultageither way, it's not Ubuntu, and I am really really offended by that shit name18:05
paultagalmost as much as unity's pre-alpha crap making it to the desktop18:05
paultagI love how the Ubuntu community no longer has a say in any matters of importance18:05
paultagis the design team in the community yet?18:05
jrgiffordno, as far as I can tell no18:08
paultaglordy18:09
paultagI'm super glad I'm in Debian now18:09
cprofittI thought it was tried... and something did not work18:09
paultagside-note, almost half-way through the DD process18:09
cprofittbut I did not follow that closely18:09
paultagcprofitt: with the number of people who are non-technical contributing, I think that says more about them18:09
paultagnot to mention they don't use Ubuntu in their own processes18:09
paultagthey love their photoshop, which is fine, but it's ironic18:10
* cprofitt nods18:10
dzhoubuntu has always attracted some people who are lukewarm, at best, about software freedom.18:19
paultagIt seems like this new CoC is only here to stifle people's dislike of Unity18:20
paultagin fact, it seems like that's the only thing18:20
paultagsee '''Decisiveness has value in itself.''' / '''Value decisiveness, clarity and consensus.'''18:20
paultagcprofitt: ^18:20
paultagthose are stupid clauses18:20
dzhooh18:20
jrgiffordyeah, exactly.18:20
jrgiffordi mean, here's how it'd play out:18:21
paultagso that mark can now hold people in violation of CoC for saying Unity sucks18:21
paultagwhich is absurdist hitlarian behavior18:21
jrgifford(paultag stole my example. well done)18:21
jrgiffordanother thing would be if i were to close and delete a rant on ask ubuntu18:21
cprofittwell... I think that there are other concerns addressed, but I would certainly send those comments in18:21
jrgiffordand someone took offense at that, boom, i'm in violation.18:22
paultagI will not be held in violation of the CoC if I'm critisizing a decision18:22
paultagI refuse to let that happen18:22
jrgiffordbecause i'm not being "respectful", or "open", since I no longer have a part in the democratic process on AU.18:23
jrgiffordso there, without even thinking, we have two examples of how we could violate it.18:24
jrgifford(or be accused of it)18:24
paultagit's absurd18:25
jrgiffordpaultag: do you intend to send your feedback in?18:25
Unit193But, you shouldn't rant about Unity in support channels.18:25
paultagjrgifford: you bet your sweet ass I will18:26
jrgiffordUnit193: beside the point.18:26
paultagUnit193: would you consider planet.ubuntu an official Ubuntu channel?18:26
paultagUnit193: if I post an entry saying "Unity sucks, here's why" am I in violation of the CoC?18:26
paultagDoes the CoC not apply to posts there?18:26
paultagWe expect everyone who participates in Ubuntu, represents the project18:27
paultagofficially or informally, or claims affiliation with the project, to18:27
paultaghonour this Code of Conduct in public or private correspondence. It18:27
paultaggoverns how we behave when Ubuntu will be judged by our actions.18:27
dzhohaha, fuck that18:27
Unit193paultag: Missed the "support channel" part. I'm talking in support IRC channels.  That seems better as it's not just screaming that it's bad, it's saying why it is bad.18:27
paultagUnit193: So the CoC doesn't apply elsewhere?18:27
dzhoI guess the "participates in Ubuntu" bit is overreach18:27
paultagUnit193: it says right there in public and private correspondence.18:27
Unit193Missed my point, file it in /dev/null.18:27
paultagdone18:28
jrgiffordok, even if I at a LUG, and I was saying that Unity sucks when doing X, and GNOME shell is awesome for X, then i'd be violating this.18:28
paultagright18:28
paultagor even at a bar18:28
jrgiffordbecause A. I'm *probably* wearing a ubuntu tshirt, B. I'm probably talking to someone who I just met, and C. (if I were to) I have signed this and agreed to abide by it.18:29
Unit193That's a little overactive.18:30
jrgiffordUnit193: people said the same thing about the whole "censorship" part of PIPA/SOPA. Its not the intent of the "law" or whatever, its the spirit and letter.18:31
Unit193jrgifford: I was saying on the CoC half, not yours.18:31
jrgiffordUnit193: ah, my apologies then.18:32
Unit193I should just be silent as everything isn't going well...18:32
dzholot of energy in this18:34
dzhoI'm not convinced this is about silencing Unity critics.18:35
dzhocprofitt and I have talked about this before, I take this sort of tumult as a sign of Ubuntu maturing.18:36
dzhoin its early honeymoon phases it was a lot easier for people to be distracted by the shiny18:36
dzhobut its a tough old war horse now, and not so pretty anymore18:36
dzhoand lo and behold, it is starting to look a bit like debian in terms of internecine angst18:37
dzhoand ${DEATH_OF_PROJECT_IMMINENT}18:37
jrgiffordpaultag: do you mind if I quote from this IRC log (here in channel) extensively in my feedback?18:42
paultagjrgifford: if you don't mind avoiding me, I'm posting a very long email, and I plan to blog it.18:42
jrgiffordpaultag: fair enough.18:42
paultagjrgifford: sent my thoughts out18:45
paultagsuch crap18:45
Unit193Well, I'll randomly check the blog then.18:46
jrgiffordisn't up on the blog, or at least i'm not seeing it18:47
paultagI expect this to get ignored and trashed, as usual18:47
paultagheil!18:47
Unit193jrgifford: Nope, not yet.18:47
jrgiffordUnit193: ok, so i'm not not seeing things18:47
dzhowhere?18:50
Unit193blog.pault.ag18:51
Unit193Nothing up yet.18:51
jrgiffordwe wait with baited breath as he pgp signs it and prepares for the public to read his feedback.18:51
paultagI didn't post it to my blog18:51
paultagI emailed first18:51
paultagif I don't get anything back in ~8 hours, I'm going to put it on my blog18:52
Unit193Yep, that's why waiting rather than reading. :P18:52
paultagand spice up the language a bit18:52
Unit193jrgifford: For the whole "planet" to read. :D18:52
jrgiffordUnit193: :D18:52
jrgiffordpaultag: ooh, spicy.18:52
Unit193I can't quite say now that I hate unity as I've never had to use it, but I'll say that I'd never use it and wouldn't recommend it to people unless they like Win 8. At that point, you can just leave them be though. :P18:54
paultagI'd rather this be delt with quietly and off a public channel jrgifford18:54
jrgiffordfair enough.18:54
paultagjrgifford: if not, I'm going to make a big deal out of it18:54
paultaglike, a big deal18:54
Unit193jrgifford: There's a "meeting" of the CC this Thurs.18:55
paultagI will not be subject to a hitlarian dictatorship in my freetime18:55
jrgiffordyeah, i think i'll be able to make it18:55
Unit193I sure hope so, since that evening....18:55
Unit193paultag: I thought you moved into debian fully at this point.18:55
paultagUnit193: I have, but I'm still here in freenode, and active enough to have this subject me to terms I do not wish to be subject to18:56
Unit193(Not to say I don't like that you're into this)18:56
paultagI'd like to think that the CC only had good intentions18:56
paultagbut this is clearly just Unity-clause.18:56
paultagooh, what a good name for it18:57
paultagjust like Unity, it's a fucking bad idea18:57
jrgiffordthe Unity-clause: Either you are with us, or you get the boot. Cya.18:58
jrgiffordYeah, thats unity right there.18:58
paultagHeil!18:58
jrgifford(i'm not talking about the software. thats a whole different disscussion)18:59
jrgifford*discussion18:59
paultagEvery week, I'm going to take a different dicator (hitler, etc) and say in big bold letters "I approve of the Unity clause"19:16
paultagdictator19:16
canthus13just catching up.  I wonder if a mass refusal to sign/revokation of signatures for the CoC would get the point across?19:20
* canthus13 will be back. picking up kids. :P19:21
jrgiffordcanthus13: perhaps. thing is, you can't revoke that without revoking the entire key iirc19:22
Unit193jrgifford: You can.19:23
Unit193https://launchpad.net/~jrgifford/+codesofconduct19:23
jrgiffordOH. i missed that.19:24
jrgiffordthanks Unit19319:24
Unit193:)19:25
* canthus13 nods.19:28
paultagalright, jrgifford19:54
paultagjrgifford: I said some very harsh things, but people understood and agreed19:54
paultagalso over email, which is ongoing19:54
paultagbut I suspect that it'll be changed19:55
Unit193Great! You offer changes? ;P19:55
paultagUnit193: no, of course not19:56
paultagI don't care to fix something I see as not broken19:56
paultagI don't know why they insist on this change19:56
paultagI won't help them make a bad decision, just point out where it's a bad decision19:56
Unit193To add the Leadship CoC, that's all.19:56
paultagit's not the LCoC19:56
Unit193Anywho.....19:56
paultagit's the CoC, straight up19:56
paultagand it has more then was in the LCoC19:56
paultagseeing as how I signed the LCoC and agree with it19:56
jrgiffordpaultag: sweet. i sent an email as well, since I was trying to get my own (other) thoughts out of the way.19:57
paultagjrgifford: rockn'19:57
Unit193I first read it as "We haven't updated it in a while, so lets change it around", not the best of reasons...19:59
paultagI love the CoC20:00
paultagjust not this second draft, since it imposes some nasty things20:00
canthus13paultag: It's like windows EULAs... :/20:00
paultagso lame20:00
Unit193Nobody reads those...20:00
* canthus13 ponders the difficulty of throwing on Mint Debian 64...20:00
canthus13Looks like I'll have to rearrange my panels.20:01
jrgiffordcanthus13: yeah, i'm looking at how to do that as well20:10
jrgifford(installing Mint Debian)20:10
canthus13jrgifford: I like Gnome 3, and I like their implementation of it. It just looks like the debian version is a bit behind.20:11
canthus13Huh. they've completely written their own debian installer/live environment that will work with any other debian-based distro.20:12
jrgiffordcanthus13: oh? I haven't played with the full gnome3 stack in a few months,20:12
jrgiffordcanthus13: define "mass refusal".20:13
canthus13Mint's got a very nice implementation, once you remove the silly menu and the bottom bar.20:14
canthus13jrgifford: I'd suggest informing everyone you can of the changes and simply state that if they disagree they should refuse to sign the new verson, possibly revoke their signature altogether.20:14
dzhoMint fanboyism drives me a little crazy if it is at all coupled to Ubuntu criticism.20:14
jrgiffordbecause there are 760 ubuntu members, we'd need to have roughly 100 of them do it.20:14
jrgiffordheck, even 50.20:14
dzhopresent company might be an exception, if there's a pro-Debian slant to it.20:15
* canthus13 nods.20:15
jrgifforddzho: anything remotely related to "mint is awesome ubuntu sucks" (with no constructive feedback) i just tune out.20:15
canthus13dzho: The main reason for people going to mint lately seems to be Unity, so it's to be expected.20:15
dzhomjg59 had a good way of putting this, in a slightly different context.20:15
dzho> This is easy if your workflow involves putting source in at one end and getting binaries out at the other, but getting to that workflow means having a certain degree of engineering rigour.20:16
dzhohttp://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/9387.html20:16
dzhoI've got lots of respect for any entity that fields a full build environment for the entire OS their users use.20:17
dzhoMint, unfortunately, doesn't do that.  Which is ok, it just isn't comparable.20:17
cprofittpaultag: this is a draft... please do take the time to send comments... and judge by the final product20:50
paultagcprofitt: I already noted my concern20:50
* cprofitt nods20:50
paultagI'd hate to get thrown out of the Ubuntu community20:50
cprofittI would hate to see that happen to you as well.20:50
paultagso fix it ;)20:51
cprofittto be honest I am not sure I read it the same way you do... but I will take some time to reflect on it... given the perspective you have given me. I just can't do that tonight... I have Cub Scouts tonight... we are planting seeds20:51
paultagcprofitt: you should consider reading it ;)20:52
paultagIt says, after debate you may not bring it up20:52
cprofittI have read it... multiple times20:52
paultagergo, if the debate is up and you disagree (c.f. unity), you are in violation if you talk about it20:52
paultag"I think Unity is unfit for the desktop"20:52
paultagBoom, CoC violation20:52
paultagit's fairly cut and dry20:53
cprofitt we do not expect to20:54
cprofitt+delay, debate or discuss any decision after the fact, except through20:54
cprofitt+escalation to a more senior governance body20:54
cprofittthat is the critical part for you?20:54
paultagpart of it20:54
paultagrespectfus discusion and debte should be *encouraged*20:54
paultagdisruptive actions to prevent the course of action should not20:55
cprofittI agree... but what about after the decisioni is made?20:55
paultagbut I should be able to say "I think unity is a very poor choice on the desktop"20:55
paultagcprofitt: esp. after the decision is made20:55
paultagI still think Unity is not fit for the desktop20:55
paultagand saying that is now a CoC violation20:55
canthus13cprofitt: It shouldn't matter. 'decision made' != 'everyone kiss my ass and agree with me'20:55
paultagin both public and private communication20:55
paultagif you read the first stanza20:55
cprofittI understand... and I read that as you having an opinion... not engaging in a debate20:55
paultagI can no longer tweet "I don't like Unity"20:56
paultagfor fear of being thrown out20:56
cprofittI am not reading that paultag ...20:56
paultagThat's discussing it.20:56
paultagAfter the decision, which was made.20:56
paultagergo, CoC violation20:56
cprofittwould you want something that protects people's rights to express their opinion?20:56
paultagI want something that encourages that20:57
paultagonly through open discourse can we move forward20:57
paultagstifling that like communist china is a fucking sham20:57
cprofittI think there is a difference between stopping progress and stating an opinion...20:57
paultagif you read it, there's no difference20:57
cprofittI can see what the language is trying to get that there...20:57
cprofittand I think I understand your point20:57
paultagdiscussing it, in either private or public contexts is no longer acceptable20:57
Unit193I stumbled with Private or Public myself.20:58
paultagUnit193: that's always been there20:58
paultagand I'm fine with that20:58
paultagso long as there are no mandates like this20:58
paultagwhere I have to censor myself20:58
cprofittwell... it does give the avenue of engaging the relevant team or governing body20:58
paultagso?20:58
paultagthat's more disruptive20:58
paultagand you can only do that once20:58
paultagof which, they'll 9/10 times agree20:59
paultagthen you can't talk about it20:59
paultagbecause the debate's over20:59
paultagand saying "I think this is unfit for use" is no longer something you can do as an Ubuntu member20:59
paultagin any context20:59
cprofittyou mean like the debate over Banshee replacing Rythmbox?20:59
paultagit's very clear20:59
paultagor the choice to make Unity a DE20:59
paultagwhatever, who cares20:59
cprofittI am curious... because that decision got reversed...21:00
paultagcprofitt: which wouldn't happen if you can't speak out about it21:00
cprofittthough, because I was not involved, I do not know why either decision was made21:00
* canthus13 doesn't mind Unity being *A* DE.. just it's choice as the 'use it or suffer with sub-par support for anything else'21:00
paultagif this CoC was in place, we'd not be reversed21:00
paultagdon't you see, the point is to *encourage* discussion21:00
paultagnot stifle it21:00
cprofittpaultag: I do... I do... and but I also agree that at some point the discussion need to not impede the decision21:01
canthus13The only reason I can see for it is to keep everyone else from reminding the people at the top that Unity is a stupid idea. :P21:01
paultagcprofitt: that clause establishes a frightning clause that only causes issues21:01
paultagcprofitt: encouraging respectful discussion without preventing it's implementation is what you *WANT*21:01
paultagcprofitt: telling people to shut up after someone makes a bad decision isn't21:01
paultagwhich is what this is doing21:01
paultagI've never once blocked something technically, and I never will21:02
paultagbut so help me, I will always open up discussion on it21:02
cprofittI just do not see the intent as going that far paultag... I can see the room there for someone to make that claim though.21:02
paultagand preventing that is worse then most facist goverments21:02
paultagcprofitt: look, the verbage is cut and dry, it's a CoC violation to speak out against a bad decision that was made21:02
paultagcprofitt: who cares about the intent, the wording is the wording21:03
cprofittI certainly will think on it... I believe I Know what the intent is... and that may color my reading of it21:03
paultagyou can't claim intent down the road21:03
cprofittwell the current wording is there for public comment... and it can change prior to release21:03
paultagI understand, I had this discussion elsewhere (community-team) where most people agreed with my reading21:03
paultagand now see it's a very poorly written clause21:03
paultagvery poorly21:03
paultagintent has nothing to do with it21:04
cprofittI need to go get ready for scouts... but I will re-read it and think on it.21:04
paultagcheers21:04
paultag(such a shame such discussion as we're having now won't be tolerated by the CoC-mark-two)21:05
cprofittI am confident we will look at all the suggestions that come in from the community when we meet to discuss the CoC revision21:05
cprofitthave a great night everyone!21:05
canthus13paultag: I don't think he liked listening to you...21:09
paultagcanthus13: nope21:24
paultagcanthus13: because he wrote it21:24
paultagand he never admits he's wrong21:25
* canthus13 nods.21:25
dzhopaultag: unless you're talking about someone else, I think you've got him wrong.23:37
dzho"after the decision is made" only makes sense in the context of something that is *not* constantly changing.23:39
dzhothere is always a new set of decisions going forward to be made.23:40
canthus13dzho: it still means that even though unity is garbage, since it's not changing nobody is allowed complain.23:42

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!