Hi, At our meeting we decided to open a bug where we can discuss and vote about the future with having cokehabit as an userrep. Please paste any information/mail/irclog you have about this issue and lets have a good discussion about this topic. Regards Alex
21:33 < antarus> aha 21:33 < antarus> so Cokehabit 21:33 < antarus> I generally agree with marienz 21:34 < antarus> but then the userrep thing was done rather quickly 21:34 < antarus> as neddyseagoon would say 21:35 < antarus> There were no expectations of what a user-rep should do 21:35 < antarus> no timeframes 21:35 < antarus> no nothing really 21:35 < antarus> so it's hard to 'abuse his power' 21:38 * mark_alec points antarus to the bug for those comments The guy is an ass, no doubt. But an ass is not a reason for termination. Otherwise other assholes in Gentoo would also be terminated (myself included on occasion). I say he stays unless someone can prove he is truly harming the project. Doing nothing is not harm in my book. I'd rather improve the requirements for User-Reps overall. What are they meant to do? what kind of role do they play in Gentoo affairs? I think user voting is a stupid idea; in the US we actually have this stupid electorial college that elects our leader. Basically let the users nominate people whom they think are a fit for the job and then let us interview them. I think this would avoid the CokeHabit-like poeple as we will generally have an idea of their merit beforehand. I know there are a lot of people (on irc, because thats where I hang out) who would at least try to do more for Gentoo Users than CokeHabit has. I think a UserRep is a really tough job because it's very ambigious. Summarize: Leave Cokehabit in office unless he abuses his UserRep power, or does something "really stupid". Sparring with a few users is IMHO expected (if not so much excuseable.) Currently Developers are not really expelled for complaints either so I don't see how you can enforce it differently here; unless you wish to wield your power a different manner. Figure out what you want UserReps to do, from our end. Come up with a better selection process; preferably with more exposure and whatnot. A first time launch project like this is bound to be buggy and thats ok as long as we are willing to improve.
Hi. I have to agree that George can be a pain in the rear ;), but I haven't seen any change in his behaviour in the last days. About the issue with spb and #gentoo-uk, I think we need more info. By the way, the "threats" to spb, afaik, were made quite a few years ago on a Gentoo-UK conference - so they have nothing to do with his role as an userrep. George, we would like to see you work more, do more for the users and generally do a better userrep job. About the userrep role and the selection, I don't agree with most of the discussion. I believe that having members selected by the Gentoo user base is a "good thing". I also don't think userrel should "interview" them or "filter" them. I think there should be a code of conduct and that userrel can and should enforce it and, when necessary, to remove an userrep - however, an user shouldn't / can't be removed only because userrel doesn't like him. I understand the concern and interest in having members that aren't necessarily popular but that can provide valuable feedback. I think that the userrep team for next year should include elected members and members chosen by userrel. This should help form a balance between people selected by the users and people capable of providing valuable feedback. My 0.02
Hi. I have to agree that George can be a pain in the rear ;), but I haven't seen any change in his behaviour in the last days. About the issue with spb and #gentoo-uk, I think we need more info. By the way, the "threats" to spb, afaik, were made quite a few years ago on a Gentoo-UK conference - so they have nothing to do with his role as an userrep. George, we would like to see you work more, do more for the users and generally do a better userrep job. About the userrep role and the selection, I don't agree with most of the discussion. I believe that having members selected by the Gentoo user base is a "good thing". I also don't think userrel should "interview" them or "filter" them. I think there should be a code of conduct and that userrel can and should enforce it and, when necessary, to remove an userrep - however, an user shouldn't / can't be removed only because userrel doesn't like him. I understand the concern and interest in having members that aren't necessarily popular but that can provide valuable feedback. I think that the userrep team for next year should include elected members and members chosen by userrel. This should help form a balance between people selected by the users and people capable of providing valuable feedback. My 0.02, Jorge.
This is still going on? On that note, why it the original bug _still_ locked even for Gentoo developers? On another note, how about moving to discussions on userreps behaviour which _really_ negatively affects gentoo users, instead of sorting out personal issue between ciaranm, spb and cokehabit? Want an example? See http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-509252.html
(In reply to comment #2) > I have to agree that George can be a pain in the rear ;), but I haven't seen > any change in his behaviour in the last days. About the issue with spb and > #gentoo-uk, I think we need more info. By the way, the "threats" to spb, afaik, > were made quite a few years ago on a Gentoo-UK conference - so they have > nothing to do with his role as an userrep. This was made during the period where I have been developer, which is just under two months. The logs goes here (From #Gentoo-Userrep) from Oct 17 2006. 10:21:04+ cokehabit : spb: unban me from the channel 10:21:09 spb : why 10:21:19+ cokehabit : because i did nothing wrong 10:21:32 spb : you evaded a ban 10:22:01 spb : which means that while the first one may only have lasted ten minutes, the second one will last longer 10:22:03+ cokehabit : no i identified to send a private message 10:22:19 spb : and then conveniently rejoined with a different hostname 10:22:20+ cokehabit : to ask for the ban to be lifted 10:22:30+ cokehabit : so? 10:22:45 spb : so you joined with a different hostname while your original one was banned 10:22:50 spb : which is commonly known as 'evasion' 10:23:13+ cokehabit : i couldn't care less 10:23:44 spb : if you couldn't care less then stop whining about it 10:23:49+ cokehabit : you should have banned me by name 10:24:05+ cokehabit : i couldn't care less what you call it 10:24:35 spb : names are even easier to change than hosts 10:24:48+ cokehabit : i wouldn't have changed my name though 10:24:56 spb : i banned by whatever my client did by default 10:25:09+ cokehabit : blame your client then 10:25:51 spb : no 10:26:01 spb : blame the person who deliberately rejoined with a different host 10:26:20+ cokehabit : thats too easy 10:26:26 spb : and don't try to tell me that you rejoin with a 68 second delay either 10:26:32+ cokehabit : what am i meant to do if i want to send a pm? 10:26:46 spb : identify and don't join the channel where i just banned you ? 10:26:46+ cokehabit : just let me back in 10:26:51 spb : it's quite simple 10:27:06+ cokehabit : you banned me for no reason 10:27:13+ cokehabit : i thought i would be unbanned 10:27:19 spb : and no, i won't lift a ban just because someone whines about it 10:27:56+ cokehabit : you know next time i wont just threaten you 10:28:01 spb : o rly 10:28:24+ cokehabit : yeah 10:28:51 spb : what will you do instead 10:29:54+ cokehabit : heh 10:30:01+ cokehabit : nice try 10:30:27+ cokehabit : now stop being such a child and let me back in 10:30:36 spb : i already answered that one
@jakub: what do you want to do about conrad? We contacted him, asked him to add a big red warning on top of his post, which he did, and that seemed to satisfy everybody. We can't (and don't want to) force him not to write a stupid install doc if he wants to. I think he makes clear that he isn't related to gentoo in any way (other than using it as a basis of his install, of course), so I fail to see on what behalf we should tell him what to do and what not to do. Sorry about the digression, we can probably move this discussion elsewhere if needed.
(In reply to comment #4) Mainly, where's the reason _why_ cokehabit has been banned in the first place? So again, without that background that really makes an impression that they are having personal issues with each other. Not much of an business for userrel I'd say? (In reply to comment #5) > I think he makes clear that he isn't related to gentoo in > any way (other than using it as a basis of his install, of course), so I fail > to see on what behalf we should tell him what to do and what not to do. Except for that shiny 'User Rep' title above his avatar? Oh well... the point was - the above stupid "howto" clearly negatively affects many more users and developers than some IRC fights between spb and cokehabit. > Sorry about the digression, we can probably move this discussion elsewhere if > needed. Yes, good idea.
(In reply to comment #3) > This is still going on? On that note, why it the original bug _still_ locked > even for Gentoo developers? Because I don't want people commenting on it when its already been taken care of. If I could make it read only then I would; but those permissions are not available. > On another note, how about moving to discussions on > userreps behaviour which _really_ negatively affects gentoo users, instead of > sorting out personal issue between ciaranm, spb and cokehabit? > > Want an example? See http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-509252.html > If you have a problem with Conrad then open another bug; don't spam this one.
(In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #4) > > Mainly, where's the reason _why_ cokehabit has been banned in the first place? > So again, without that background that really makes an impression that they are > having personal issues with each other. Not much of an business for userrel I'd > say? > When was cokehabit banned? He was warned about his behavior as a user-rep; which I may add is the only thing he has done 'wrong'. If the only complaintants are Spb and Ciaran then I'm inclined to ignore them as it's a fairly common occurance. IMHO it is the hole that those two have dug themselves. Cry wolf enough and you end up ignored by most people.
(In reply to comment #8) > IMHO it is the hole that those two have dug > themselves. Cry wolf enough and you end up ignored by most people. > Well, in the case of ciaranm, I think we can go as far as saying that's what happens when you have a "wolf in sheep's clothing". ;)
It is not about why cokehabit got banned, and I am not even sure whether it was in a #Gentoo* channel or some private UK stuff or whatever. My concerns rely on this line: 10:27:56+ cokehabit : you know next time i wont just threaten you Which maybe is said in rage, but this is not acceptable by anyone. Another thing, which was sent to userrel some time ago: 14:30:28 < djay-il> so what, now all you will do is forum-related things? and about everything else you'll say "don't care" ? 14:34:24 <+cokehabit> oh yeah 14:34:30 <+cokehabit> fuck everything else 14:34:49 <+cokehabit> no i can go away until the voting next year 14:34:52 <+cokehabit> *now 14:35:05 <+cokehabit> turn up 1 week before the voting starts 14:35:18 <+cokehabit> make sure i get most of the votes again 14:35:20 <+cokehabit> win 14:35:35 <+cokehabit> then go on hiatus for another year
(In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #6) > > Mainly, where's the reason _why_ cokehabit has been banned in the first place? > > When was cokehabit banned? He was warned about his behavior as a user-rep; > which I may add is the only thing he has done 'wrong'. I'm referring to the log posted in Comment #4 here... Really useless without knowing why was cokehabit banned in the first place (In reply to comment #10) > My concerns rely on this line: > 10:27:56+ cokehabit : you know next time i wont just threaten you > > Which maybe is said in rage, but this is not acceptable by anyone. Shrug; maybe those two really should sort out this in front of a pub. Could save time of lots of people here. :P
cokehabit has posted a 'poem' that I believe is unacceptable to post as a userrep. While my vote before was to keep him until the end of the term, I am being swayed to kick him out soon. http://cokehabit.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=9 : The joys of poems Written to the tune of "I'm a little teapot" I'm a little ciaranm, short and stout, open my mouth and... ...shit comes out I'm the mini-ciaranm Damn i'm ugly Guess my name it's ess pee bee
(In reply to comment #12) > cokehabit has posted a 'poem' that I believe is unacceptable to post as a > userrep. While my vote before was to keep him until the end of the term, I am > being swayed to kick him out soon. > > http://cokehabit.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=9 : > > The joys of poems > Written to the tune of "I'm a little teapot" > > I'm a little ciaranm, > short and stout, > open my mouth and... > ...shit comes out > > I'm the mini-ciaranm > Damn i'm ugly > Guess my name > it's ess pee bee > It's his personal blog. I could blog about how much I hate someone (lets pick Seemant!) and I wouldn't get fired over it. It's not in good taste however. Once again it's a matter of selective enforcement. Either you fire everyone violating or you fire no one. He needs to do something worse. This is also a ciaran/spb issue which I'm willing to ignore for the most part. Ciaran is not a normal user (and spb is a dev!)
(In reply to comment #12) > cokehabit has posted a 'poem' that I believe is unacceptable to post as a > userrep. While my vote before was to keep him until the end of the term, I am > being swayed to kick him out soon. > Mark, I agree with Alec on this issue.
Ciaran is not a normal user? How can we say that? He's not userrep nor developer. He's a former developer, but I agree that it wont help them with their personal hate to each other... I think it's stupid behavior by anyone, and in my opinion there is nothing we can do about it, but it's something we can add to cokehabit's list of stupid things...
Alright I will chime in. The feud between cokehabit and ciaranm has been going on for quite a while. A lot of us know that ciaranm has the ability to rub you the wrong way quite easily. What cokehabit has done on his blog is as far as I'm concerned is inadmissible to be used against him to kick him out. The reason I feel this is that it is on his personal site which might be viewed by gentoo users but its not a reflection on the project as his site is in no way a part of gentoo. Could he of been tactful and not posted it sure. Should he be removed because he took a liberty with free speech on his site no.
Of course we should allow free speech in our people's blogs and on their private homepages, but, I do not think that cokehabit is representing Gentoo in a good manner. He and Ciaran do not like each other. We all know that, but I do not think the fact that 'Ciaran being Ciaran' is a very good way of handling this. Stephen Bennet is even one our current developers. How can we allow a userrep, in a public Gentoo channel to threat one of our developers? We have warned him before and he have not done anything about it since then. He is the same one as before the first warning. We can not tell Ciaran to stop talking about cokehabit. We can ban him from forums if he does and so on, but our userrep (who is there to represent gentoo) is allowed to write stupid things about our users? And as far as I know he did not care about the last e-mail we sent him, but I am not sure about that one. I would like to hear some comments. Especially about the user vs. userrep and the userrep vs. developer 'issues'. You are allowed to correct me, if I am totally wrong. I am still new in Gentoo and maybe I am not 'in' with how we are normally handling such cases :)
(In reply to comment #17) > Of course we should allow free speech in our people's blogs and on their > private homepages, but, I do not think that cokehabit is representing Gentoo in > a good manner. Afaik, userreps are here to represent users, not Gentoo. But maybe I'm wrong here? > > He and Ciaran do not like each other. We all know that, but I do not think the > fact that 'Ciaran being Ciaran' is a very good way of handling this. > > Stephen Bennet is even one our current developers. How can we allow a userrep, > in a public Gentoo channel to threat one of our developers? > Other developers have threatened each other all the time. Other developers slander each other all the time on public lists and nothing is done. Spb has not filed a complaint about it so I consider it a non-issue. > We have warned him before and he have not done anything about it since then. He > is the same one as before the first warning. > > We can not tell Ciaran to stop talking about cokehabit. We can ban him from > forums if he does and so on, but our userrep (who is there to represent gentoo) > is allowed to write stupid things about our users? Yeah, they can write whatever they like as long as they aren't misrepresenting Gentoo as a whole. I don't think it's a smart thing to do (regarding making fun of others in public or whatnot) but it's their choice to do so. > > And as far as I know he did not care about the last e-mail we sent him, but I > am not sure about that one. > > I would like to hear some comments. Especially about the user vs. userrep and > the userrep vs. developer 'issues'. > > You are allowed to correct me, if I am totally wrong. I am still new in Gentoo > and maybe I am not 'in' with how we are normally handling such cases :) > Afaik very few developers have been fired from Gentoo. It takes a lot of action (or it takes a lot of higher ups to hate your guts). The higher up thing is a thing of the past (new non-cabal devrel doesn't tend to fire people they hate, there needs to be a reason). This is why I keep commenting here; everyone here seems to dislike Cokehabits activity but it is his choice to do it. As long as he doesn't do anything technically wrong then he shouldn't be able to get discharged over it. As much as we say "people should be nice and courtious to users and developers alike" no one enforces this (not even internally) so I don't see a reason to apply it here; other than to remove Cokehabit on some double standard.
(In reply to comment #18) > Spb has > not filed a complaint about it so I consider it a non-issue. As far as I can recall, I emailed userrel@ with the log in question and spoke to at least two userrel members about it. If that's not considered filing a complaint then please tell me what I need to do so that it is considered an issue.
(In reply to comment #18) > (In reply to comment #17) > > Of course we should allow free speech in our people's blogs and on their > > private homepages, but, I do not think that cokehabit is representing Gentoo in > > a good manner. > > Afaik, userreps are here to represent users, not Gentoo. But maybe I'm wrong > here? Sorry, you are right. I am wrong. I keep saying that userreps is here to represent Gentoo, but it is the users they are representing. Sorry! But, is it good to have a userrep, who over and over again interfere with one our users. > > > > He and Ciaran do not like each other. We all know that, but I do not think the > > fact that 'Ciaran being Ciaran' is a very good way of handling this. > > > > Stephen Bennet is even one our current developers. How can we allow a userrep, > > in a public Gentoo channel to threat one of our developers? > > > > Other developers have threatened each other all the time. Other developers > slander each other all the time on public lists and nothing is done. Spb has > not filed a complaint about it so I consider it a non-issue. > > > We have warned him before and he have not done anything about it since then. He > > is the same one as before the first warning. > > > > We can not tell Ciaran to stop talking about cokehabit. We can ban him from > > forums if he does and so on, but our userrep (who is there to represent gentoo) > > is allowed to write stupid things about our users? > > Yeah, they can write whatever they like as long as they aren't misrepresenting > Gentoo as a whole. I don't think it's a smart thing to do (regarding making > fun of others in public or whatnot) but it's their choice to do so. I agree. But I still think it is a bad when a user complains about a userrep and I do not think it is good to have a userrep who writes silly poems about an user. > > > > And as far as I know he did not care about the last e-mail we sent him, but I > > am not sure about that one. > > > > I would like to hear some comments. Especially about the user vs. userrep and > > the userrep vs. developer 'issues'. > > > > You are allowed to correct me, if I am totally wrong. I am still new in Gentoo > > and maybe I am not 'in' with how we are normally handling such cases :) > > > > Afaik very few developers have been fired from Gentoo. It takes a lot of > action (or it takes a lot of higher ups to hate your guts). The higher up > thing is a thing of the past (new non-cabal devrel doesn't tend to fire people > they hate, there needs to be a reason). > > This is why I keep commenting here; everyone here seems to dislike Cokehabits > activity but it is his choice to do it. As long as he doesn't do anything > technically wrong then he shouldn't be able to get discharged over it. What 'technical' stuff does a userrep need to do? They should be the man-in-the-middle between us (the developers) and our users. > As much as we say "people should be nice and courtious to users and developers > alike" no one enforces this (not even internally) so I don't see a reason to > apply it here; other than to remove Cokehabit on some double standard. There is difference between telling someone that he is an idiot, to keep writing shit about him. I do not know how dev-rel would work when something like this happens, but I guess they would talk with the guy. See if things change, if it does not, they will take actions? Or am i totally wrong? We have talked to cokehabit already once or twice, things does not seems to change. Lately with the poem about Ciaran.
(In reply to comment #20) > (In reply to comment #18) > > Afaik, userreps are here to represent users, not Gentoo. But maybe I'm wrong > > here? > Sorry, you are right. I am wrong. I keep saying that userreps is here to > represent Gentoo, but it is the users they are representing. Sorry! > > But, is it good to have a userrep, who over and over again interfere with one > our users. Alexander, I would prefer cokehabit stopped attacking ciaranm, but as you say he's attacking *one* user (repeatedly, that is). Furthermore, as we all know it's not one *random* user, but a very specific user. No matter what we try to do, ciaranm and cokehabit are not going to stop sharing their *love* for each other. I haven't seen any report that cokehabit is going around the forums, MLs or IRC channels picking up fights with random users. > > Other developers have threatened each other all the time. Other developers > > slander each other all the time on public lists and nothing is done. ... > > Yeah, they can write whatever they like as long as they aren't misrepresenting > > Gentoo as a whole. I don't think it's a smart thing to do (regarding making > > fun of others in public or whatnot) but it's their choice to do so. > > I agree. But I still think it is a bad when a user complains about a userrep > and I do not think it is good to have a userrep who writes silly poems about an > user. > Same as above. It's not a *random* user, but a very specific one. > > As much as we say "people should be nice and courtious to users and developers > > alike" no one enforces this (not even internally) so I don't see a reason to > > apply it here; other than to remove Cokehabit on some double standard. > > There is difference between telling someone that he is an idiot, to keep > writing shit about him. > > I do not know how dev-rel would work when something like this happens, but I > guess they would talk with the guy. See if things change, if it does not, they > will take actions? Or am i totally wrong? > > We have talked to cokehabit already once or twice, things does not seems to > change. Lately with the poem about Ciaran. Well, in my view, with one notable exception which happened to be with ciaranm, that's not what -devrel has done in the past. I think this cokehabit vs ciaranm/spb issue is being blown out of porportion. By the way, how is this issue any more serious than ciaranm leading to plasmaroo leaving Gentoo? AFAIK, plasmaroo wasn't even the first developer that quit because of ciaranm. I didn't saw any action/complaint/ban from -devrel or -userrel against ciaranm in that case or the others. I feel that ciaranm is becoming a too common reason for devs leaving Gentoo. Thus, if -userrel is so concerned with this type of issues, why are we discussing *firing* cokehabit from userrep, but not trying to find a way to prevent ciaranm from making anyone else leave Gentoo?
(In reply to comment #21) > I would prefer cokehabit stopped attacking ciaranm, but as you say he's > attacking *one* user (repeatedly, that is). Furthermore, as we all know it's > not one *random* user, but a very specific user. No matter what we try to do, > ciaranm and cokehabit are not going to stop sharing their *love* for each > other. > I haven't seen any report that cokehabit is going around the forums, MLs or IRC > channels picking up fights with random users. Well, I agree on most of this. 1) Ciaran is a *random* user. He is even a user who involves and cares about the development of Gentoo. 2) I also think it is scary what Cokehabit said in the #Gentoo-Userrep channel. Stephen Bennet emailed a short log about this to the userrel@ alias once. 3) I have not seen Ciaran write anything bad on his blog about Cokehabit. I am not readings forums, but I like to know if he does that there? We have two guys who do not like each other. We could kindly ask one of them (cokehabit) to please ignore what Ciaran says/does which he things is wrong. We can not do that with Ciaran since he is an user. > Well, in my view, with one notable exception which happened to be with ciaranm, > that's not what -devrel has done in the past. > I think this cokehabit vs ciaranm/spb issue is being blown out of porportion. > By the way, how is this issue any more serious than ciaranm leading to > plasmaroo leaving Gentoo? AFAIK, plasmaroo wasn't even the first developer that > quit because of ciaranm. I didn't saw any action/complaint/ban from -devrel or > -userrel against ciaranm in that case or the others. I feel that ciaranm is > becoming a too common reason for devs leaving Gentoo. > Thus, if -userrel is so concerned with this type of issues, why are we > discussing *firing* cokehabit from userrep, but not trying to find a way to > prevent ciaranm from making anyone else leave Gentoo? You have talked with Tim about this? I do not think it is the _only_ reason he left. Maybe we should close this bug, see if anything goes on in the further and then reopen it and discuss it then. It seems to me that I am the only one thinking that Ciaran *is* a random user. The rest seem to ignore things when he is involved. Let me hear what you think. Should we wait and see if things evolves?
What about letting ciaranm and cokehabit get CC'ed on this bug. They can both see what we have talked about, if they have any comments we can react on that if they start bitching about each other, we can remove them. I would like to know what they both thinks could be done. Any objections on this?
Added Ciaran. I would like to hear what he thinks about this. If people wants cokehabit too, then add him.
(In reply to comment #24) > Added Ciaran. > > I would like to hear what he thinks about this. > > If people wants cokehabit too, then add him. > Alexander, can you please explain to me why you think ciranm needs to get involved, but cokehabit who is being discussed here doesn't?
(In reply to comment #8) > Cry wolf enough and you end up ignored by most people. When exactly have I cried wolf? (In reply to comment #6) > Mainly, where's the reason _why_ cokehabit has been banned in the first place? > So again, without that background that really makes an impression that they are > having personal issues with each other. Not much of an business for userrel I'd > say? So under what circumstances would it be acceptable to threaten to kill / beat up someone as a result of them having banned you? (In reply to comment #12) > cokehabit has posted a 'poem' that I believe is unacceptable to post as a > userrep. While my vote before was to keep him until the end of the term, I am > being swayed to kick him out soon. > > http://cokehabit.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=9 : Now that's far more offensive than anything I've ever been accused of doing. Is this comment considered a sufficient complaint, or should I reopen bug 148116? (In reply to comment #21) > By the way, how is this issue any more serious than ciaranm leading to > plasmaroo leaving Gentoo? Oooh! The FUD! The FUD! Plasmaroo left because he didn't like being overruled on an issue where he was deliberately violating a licence in order to make himself look important. I escalated the issue only after he'd refused to fix it several times himself. > AFAIK, plasmaroo wasn't even the first developer that quit because of ciaranm. Aahhh, more FUD. > I feel that ciaranm is becoming a too common reason for devs leaving Gentoo. Oooooh, you feel it do you? Now how about sticking to facts, rather than attempting to scare people into believing that the ciaranm boogeyman is going to eat their children?
(In reply to comment #22) > Well, I agree on most of this. ... > 3) I have not seen Ciaran write anything bad on his blog about Cokehabit. I am > not readings forums, but I like to know if he does that there? Alexander, ciaranm has been banned from the forums before for attacking people. I would strongly suggest you search for his posts there. About his attacks and tactics I suggest you read https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148116 > > Well, in my view, with one notable exception which happened to be with ciaranm, > > that's not what -devrel has done in the past. > > I think this cokehabit vs ciaranm/spb issue is being blown out of porportion. > > By the way, how is this issue any more serious than ciaranm leading to > > plasmaroo leaving Gentoo? ... > You have talked with Tim about this? I do not think it is the _only_ reason he > left. > Yes, I've talked with him. But you just need to read plasmaroo goodbye mails to see how the attacks by ciaranm and more importantly, the lack of support by the Gentoo community, led him to resign. I'm not saying that he left *exclusively* because of ciaranm, but that was an important reason. > It seems to me that I am the only one thinking that Ciaran *is* a random user. > The rest seem to ignore things when he is involved. If you want to understand why most people react that way, I suggest you *glance* over https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=114944
(In reply to comment #27) > ciaranm has been banned from the forums before for attacking people. ...and then was unbanned when it turned out that the guy who got me banned was lying. > Yes, I've talked with him. But you just need to read plasmaroo goodbye mails to > see how the attacks by ciaranm and more importantly, the lack of support by the > Gentoo community, led him to resign. I'm not saying that he left *exclusively* > because of ciaranm, but that was an important reason. The lack of support from the Gentoo community for someone who deliberately violates an open source licence, yes. Now why does that surprise you? > > It seems to me that I am the only one thinking > that Ciaran *is* a random user. > > The rest seem to ignore things when he is involved. > > If you want to understand why most people react that way, I suggest you > *glance* over https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=114944 Yes. Glance. Don't read it too carefully, because you might start picking up just how much nonsense there is in that bug.
Can we please keep the discussion on cokehabit? It's neither the time nor the place to have a ciaranm trial. Also, why isn't cokehabit on CC yet? We should give him a chance to explain things (even though a previous attempt at this led to no response from him).
(In reply to comment #22) > (In reply to comment #21) > > I would prefer cokehabit stopped attacking ciaranm, but as you say he's > > attacking *one* user (repeatedly, that is). Furthermore, as we all know it's > > not one *random* user, but a very specific user. No matter what we try to do, > > ciaranm and cokehabit are not going to stop sharing their *love* for each > > other. > > I haven't seen any report that cokehabit is going around the forums, MLs or IRC > > channels picking up fights with random users. > Well, I agree on most of this. > 1) Ciaran is a *random* user. He is even a user who involves and cares about > the development of Gentoo. Where are all the other complaints flooding in? So far I've seen one from Ciaran, one from spb, and one from some user whose name I don't recall who got banned from an irc channel (that too may have been spb or Ciaran, I really don't recall, but I'll assume it was someone else). As has been previously mentioned, personal differences are not grounds for removal. > 2) I also think it is scary what Cokehabit said in the #Gentoo-Userrep channel. > Stephen Bennet emailed a short log about this to the userrel@ alias once. I'll agree more needs to be done with regards to that, it would be nice if cokehabit was actually on irc for once ;) > 3) I have not seen Ciaran write anything bad on his blog about Cokehabit. I am > not readings forums, but I like to know if he does that there? > Afaik I told the forums people that it was their domain and to lay bans whereever they saw fit against either party. So for the who/what/when of forums activity, you'd have to talk to forum-mods.
I figured I'd spice it up by CCing cokehabit and removing Ciaran, for now ;)
Ciaran is added again.
I'd urge you userrel folks to go read over the initial role description for user representatives again. Paying particular attention to: * Be willing to network with a wide range of other users. * Be seen as approachable by others, so that people will be open about their views. Be non-judgemental and show sensitivity towards what may be difficult issues. * Work constructively with developers and staff. Not be scared or intimidated by developers, but to view them as people doing the best they can within constraints. Should it be necessary to challenge them, do so in a supportive manner wherever possible. * Be able to negotiate, to make the case for a particular course of action, and willing to compromise where appropriate. * Be able to step outside of his/her own experience, and be able to argue a viewpoint with which you may not fully agree. * Present users' views with confidence, and not be afraid to raise issues about the role or the workings of the project. That is all.
I think one big problem about this whole thing is that we are focusing too much about the complaints comes from Ciaran and Stephen. Even if Ciaran did not complaint about this behavior, it would still have been wrong in my opinion. Let us say neither Ciaran nor Stephen did complaint, then we would have a userrep saying in the public that being a userrep is nothing. "I won the election now I can go on holiday and get back for next years election.". (From the IRC log) Then the userrep threatens a guy. (Another IRC log) Then the userrep writes a poem about how bad an user is. (His blog) He repeatedly shows up in threads on forums, where the user he did write a peom about is writing to come up with things about that guy. (From bug #148116) I think all of this is very very bad behavior by an userrep and I think we need to take actions on this. If I was an user I would be quite confused about this behavior made by an userrep and especially the facts that I have not stopped yet. To the userrel members: we talked about having a meeting about this whole thing together with the userreps. Something I should take care of?
I have been thinking a bit about Christel's comment to this post. I think Cokehabit does NOT follow the guidelines of being an userrep for the gentoo users.h Therefore I think it would be best for Gentoo and the rest of the userreps to see cokehabit being expelled without the possibility of getting back as userrep.
I sent an e-mail to userrel@ a short while ago, I would urge Userrel members to respond to this so that we can ensure we have a solution sooner rather than later as the situation currently is draining the productivity, morale and motivation of project members, and we seem to not be getting any closer to a resolution. Thanks, Christel
Sorry about being late, being unfamiliar with bugzilla i didn't know that once I was cc'd i could read it. 1) Whatever I write on my own blog is my own business and none of Gentoo's. Nowhere does it mention Gentoo or any developers. 2) "10:27:56+ cokehabit : you know next time i wont just threaten you" - No next time i will kick him out of any irc channel that we are in at the same time (as long as it is not affiliated with Gentoo). 3) Shall we go over the job description as noted by Christel? "Be willing to network with a wide range of other users." - I have no idea what "other" is in this instance but i will take it as meaning "wide range of users". * I have been the one co-ordinating the opening of the userrep forum. * I have been the one actively getting the devs to participate. * I have been the one posting to gentoo-dev where the subject would be useful for users to discuss on the forums. * I have been the one trying to keep the forum free of non-relevant posts. * I am the one who suggested to kopp, the french userrep that a post was made in another language so that people didn't think it was english-only Shall i go on? "Be seen as approachable by others, so that people will be open about their views." - Most of the forum voted for me, how un-approachable is that? "Be non-judgemental and show sensitivity towards what may be difficult issues." - Sorry for exhibiting human nature the same way that you see it on gentoo-dev and on buzilla, day-after-day. Oh look it's the archangel Gabriel, i'm converted... "Work constructively with developers and staff. Not be scared or intimidated by developers, but to view them as people doing the best they can within constraints. Should it be necessary to challenge them, do so in a supportive manner wherever possible." - As was said before, it has been me that has been contacting the developers. and actively posting their comments and questions in the forum so as to get as much feedback for the developers to do their job as possible. "Be able to negotiate, to make the case for a particular course of action, and willing to compromise where appropriate." - Well that one is redundant because in christel's own words we are here to relay what the users think to the developers/userrel and get them both to communicate. If we do the job right then they are speaking and there is no need for any negotiation, anyway, negotiation would be userrel's job, not ours. "Be able to step outside of his/her own experience, and be able to argue a viewpoint with which you may not fully agree." - Not come across that one yet. Tbc "Present users' views with confidence, and not be afraid to raise issues about the role or the workings of the project." - Well from day 1 i have been raising issues - to the dislike of some at userrel and because of it most of the problems that the other userreps and i had were ironed out. Because i have no problems raising objections i seem to be delegated the task of doing it for others. This seems to make me look like a trouble maker in the eyes of some. Now the answers have been given to the objections raised is there anything else you need of me?
(In reply to comment #37) > 1) Whatever I write on my own blog is my own business and none of Gentoo's. > Nowhere does it mention Gentoo or any developers. It's rather well established that you're responsible for what you write on your blog...
(In reply to comment #38) > (In reply to comment #37) > > 1) Whatever I write on my own blog is my own business and none of Gentoo's. > > Nowhere does it mention Gentoo or any developers. > > It's rather well established that you're responsible for what you write on your > blog... > So if it is that well established why the need to bring it up? Or was it just another excuse to make a smart-alec comment?
Maybe it would also help if the interested parties would like to see that a developer in question has been posting sexually suggestive names about me on a prominant website: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cokehabit 1. cokehabit A wanker who can't spell. Cokehabit is a wanker. by spb Dec 19, 2004 Maybe this is for devrel and not here though
(In reply to comment #39) > So if it is that well established why the need to bring it up? Or was it just > another excuse to make a smart-alec comment? You misunderstand. In previous discussions of a similar nature it has always been decided that Gentoo staff can be held accountable for things that they write on non-Gentoo sites, and especially on their own personal sites. (In reply to comment #40) > Maybe it would also help if the interested parties would like to see that a > developer in question has been posting sexually suggestive names about me on a > prominant website: You wrote that yourself, didn't you?
Cokehabit has been relieved of his userrel status after providing insufficient reasoning for retaining the position. He was notified and confirmed receiving the notification e-mail. I have removed him from the website and his forums "userrep tag" has been removed. Infra can you remove his e-mail from the userrep alias please?
(In reply to comment #42) > I have removed him from the website and his forums "userrep tag" has been > removed. Infra can you remove his e-mail from the userrep alias please? > done
Okay, everything is done. Closing.
(In reply to comment #42) > Cokehabit has been relieved of his userrel status after providing insufficient > reasoning for retaining the position. He was notified and confirmed receiving > the notification e-mail. > Antarus, I don't see why you think he didn't provide enough feedback. > I have removed him from the website and his forums "userrep tag" has been > removed. Infra can you remove his e-mail from the userrep alias please? > I don't accept that userrel(?), or was it just you Antarus(?), take positions like this without at least having a vote first.
Antarus, first off sorry for my last comment directed to you. I've now had the chance to talk with christel and to cool off. I'm closing the bug again.
(In reply to comment #42) > Cokehabit has been relieved of his userrel status after providing insufficient > reasoning for retaining the position. He was notified and confirmed receiving > the notification e-mail. > > I have removed him from the website and his forums "userrep tag" has been > removed. Infra can you remove his e-mail from the userrep alias please? > I find the comment "after providing insufficient reasoning for retaining the position" a bit strange... I gave a long answer in comment #37 and no-one has questioned any of it. I would like to know how it is insufficient because no-one has asked any questions about it. The silence from userrel about it would usually be a sign that everything was sufficient. Why were there no comments or questions?
(In reply to comment #47) > (In reply to comment #42) > > Cokehabit has been relieved of his userrel status after providing insufficient > > reasoning for retaining the position. He was notified and confirmed receiving > > the notification e-mail. > > > > I have removed him from the website and his forums "userrep tag" has been > > removed. Infra can you remove his e-mail from the userrep alias please? > > > > I find the comment "after providing insufficient reasoning for retaining the > position" a bit strange... I gave a long answer in comment #37 and no-one has > questioned any of it. I would like to know how it is insufficient because > no-one has asked any questions about it. The silence from userrel about it > would usually be a sign that everything was sufficient. > > Why were there no comments or questions? > We all voted via e-mail over a three day period. The result of the vote was your termination. I don't think anyone had any questions with regards to your comments, but in the end it was decided that your activity was inappropriate, regardless of the quantity of your userrep activities.
