Re: [O] My apprehensions listed (Re: Not merging org-lparse, org-xhtml & org-odt to the core)

[Nick Dokos]

Jambunathan K <address@hidden> wrote:

> ... 
> I will tell Nick Dokos only this. Whether a person is civil or uncivil
> shouldn't really matter. Etiquette matters but doesn't matter so much as
> understanding. IMHO, everyone should make sincere effort to cut through
> and look in to a person's innermost fears, concerns and apprehensions.
> 
> 

I disagree: it most definitely matters and it's not just "etiquette"
either that I'm talking about. I'm talking about respect for the other
person's point of view; in fact, something very close to what you
express in your last sentence above. If I'm ranting and raving against
you, how can I possibly look in at your "...fears, concerns and
apprehensions"?  All I'd be thinking about is how to hurt you.

And remember that I only felt compelled to say something when I saw what
I considered an ad hominem attack. Before that, even though I most
definitely did not like the tone of the discussion, there were
reasonable technical points being addressed. The trouble is that when
the tone becomes grating (as it did), it gets harder and harder to avoid
the ad hominem part and whatever discussion was going on cannot continue
being a discussion on the matters of interest. It becomes a "me against
you" and "whoever is not for me is against me" kind of thing - there are
no shades of gray, only black and white.

That's why incivility matters.

There are of course cases where no such respect should be given: if
someone is consistently making an ass of himself, then shouting him down
may be the only alternative. But I hope that we all understand that we
are not in this situation here: there has been frustration (on both
sides), some of it legitimate, some of it perhaps not.  But I think that
both Bastien and you know deep down that you both care very much for
orgmode (that's why we are *all* here), so it behooves you (both of you)
to find a way forward.

> If this doesn't happen the person has failed in a moral sense.

[I don't understand what you mean here: which person has failed?
The same person whose fears, concerns and apprehensions have not
been understood? Or the "other"? ]

In any case, I have said more than I wanted to say on the matter at
hand, so I'll shut up for now and hope that things proceed in a more
constructive direction in the future.

Nick