[Catalyst] The Netiquette thread (OT)

[J. Shirley]

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Simon Wilcox
<simonw at digitalcraftsmen.net>wrote:

> On 28/4/09 11:13, J. Shirley wrote:
>
>  Addendum: Don't drive away prolific responders by responding to single
>> lines uttered as an aside, because you have your own gripes.
>>
>
> You mean me, obviously. In response all I'll say is that I picked you up
>  when you had repeatedly complained about top posting. It wasn't in respo=
nse
> to a single line but your repeated complaint and in particular you
> automatically complaining about top posting when the OP hadn't done any s=
uch
> thing in the case to which I responded.
>
> But I'm sorry if I caused you any offence, I realise that I was in danger
> of trolling which wasn't my intention at all. That's why I didn't  contin=
ue
> the discussion.
>
> You are more helpful on the list that I am, as you know more about Cataly=
st
> that I do, so I don't really have a good position from which to criticise.
>
> I did consider sending this as a private email but I'll send it back to t=
he
> list to acknowledge that meta-complaints just don't help. I'll endeavour =
not
> to repeat the mistake !
>
> Rgds,
>
> Simon.
>
>
>
Your point about it being automated is fairly accurate.  When I notice it, I
simply start my thread off with a single line pointing it out.  It is very
little more than that, and I often do not put any additional thought into
the matter.  He (Akimoto) just basically got the response from 'autopilot'
because he relentlessly posts in random and weird formats, making his
messages difficult to parse and difficult to respond to.

You didn't cause me offense.  You caused irritation, and there is a subtle
difference.  Offense is when you take things personally that you shouldn't.
Irritation is when you go, "Why do I bother?"

That's why I'm taking the time to post now, publicly, about how irritating
it can be when you devote time and energy into something and people only
come in to attack something on the sideline.

It's not just mailing lists, it happens frequently in open source
contributions.  Some people who are more heavily vested don't get phased by
it, but others do.  Ultimately it is very damaging to any community, and at
the core it is all just bike shedding.

People lack the confidence to respond to the original point, so they attach
to a minor inconsequential detail.

This behavior has basically stopped me from contributing to anything beyond
the mailing list and blog posts, because I don't have the patience to deal
with the bikeshedding and handling signal to noise.  Fortunately, in most
cases, mailing list posts are seldom afflicted with bikeshedding and when
they are I simply mute that thread and move on.

Keeps me happy, at least.

The message here isn't about me, though.  I'm much more meta about it.

It is about the people who know the answers, but lack the confidence, and
instead contribute to bikeshedding.  It's damaging to any aspect of any
volunteer based community.

Please consider how your words and actions can impact the group.

Every time a bikeshedder runs off a contributor, God kills MSTs braincells.
Please save MSTs braincells.

So, look at that... I still ended up writing my rant.  Damnit.

Just remember, ask yourself, "Is this good for the company?"

-J
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/pipermail/catalyst/attachments/20090428/4e090=
9b1/attachment.htm