[Savannah-hackers] Re: [CoreTeam]Re: [support #102654] Abuse of the BUG tracking system

[Mathieu Roy]

Norbert Bollow <address@hidden> said:

>> This way, it will not sound as a black-listing of someone due to a bad
>> historical account.
>
> This is an extreme situation in which such "blacklisting" has
> happened.  Why would one want to make the situation sound different
> from how it actually is?

Blacklisting is a behavior I cannot respect. Even if it was, IMHO, it
should not be any longer.

I'm not sure that I'm the only one that disapprove blacklisting. So if
I close the mdupont request by saying "this project has set you on a
blacklist, this is a behavior I do not support but it is up to them",
I do not think it will be a "win-win" end, lowering the respectability
of your project in some people eyes.


>> it is worth making the effort to write fair rules anyway.
>> 
>> Can you post a message with such rules? It can be only 4 lines, it 
>> does not needs to take long, it just have to address the problem of
>> mdupont messages in a neutral way; not focused on mdupont.
>
> Here's what I came up with.  It sounds a bit angry, so I have some
> doubts whether publishing it is really a good idea.
>
> """
> The DotGNU project welcomes contributions as well as criticism from
> everyone who is capable of discussing disagreements in a decent
> manner.  In case of conflicts, every conceivable attempt will be
> made to resolve the issue in a mutually acceptable way.  If someone
> abuses the project's communication infrastructure (irc channel,
> mailing list, bug tracker, etc) for purposes of harassment, the
> offender will get at least a dozen warnings and at least two "last
> chances" before the offender gets permanently "banned",
> i.e. disallowed from using the project's communication infrastructure.
> """

This is not the kind of rules I had in mind. I do not think that
making explicit the establishment of black-list is better than keeping
it implicit.

In others words, if you admit being do blacklisting, in some way, it
makes mdupont claims right -- which was that your project is doing
blacklisting.

As someone said in one report of mdupont closed with a brutal message,
even a patch from someone deeply involved in proprietary software
should be considered. Estimating a work on its author historical
account but not on the work itself is considered as an immoral
attitude by many persons.

So the kind of rules I was thinking of was more about the work
actually done.

For instance:
    - spam or aggressive messages on irc: kicked from the channel
    - bug report of a trivial item with no patch: bug report considered
    as invalid 
    - ...

With this kind of rules, you would following a morally acceptable
policy: estimating the work on what it is actually, not focusing on
the man behind.


-- 
Mathieu Roy

  +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
  | General Homepage:           http://yeupou.coleumes.org/             |
  | Computing Homepage:         http://alberich.coleumes.org/           |
  | Not a native english speaker:                                       |
  |     http://stock.coleumes.org/doc.php?i=/misc-files/flawed-english  |
  +---------------------------------------------------------------------+