<OneOfOne> hello, i'm really sorry but this is too much <OneOfOne> he attacks me personally and dont even have the guts to talk directly to me <OneOfOne> <ciaranm> so now we have oneofone maintaining love-, and it's worse than ever <OneOfOne> btw i didnt even talk to him before he started attacking me and last time i even talked about reiser4/love-sources on #gentoo was weeks ago, i'm on a break of it because of my college exams We know, from observation in both #gentoo and #gentoo-dev that he does continually antagonise both redeeman and oneofone as well.
now, in the past, ciaranm was warned due to his constant antagonism of iggy and the kernel team as well. ciaran really really needs to learn how to a) be tactful and b) get _along_ with people
I'm recommending at least a 30 day suspention for him. He's been warned repeatedly to stop antagonizing people, and he keeps doing it. The last time he did this to the point where someone complained, he was told that that would be his last warning.
What standard are we holding devs to here? I've interacted with OneofOne myself and find him to be a gigantic pain in the ass and a major whiner. Reading over the one line that ciaranm said, I agree it isn't tactful, but it was in context of a larger discussion and he was stating his opinion. He didn't tell OneofOne to lick his swamp nor was he rude. He simply made a statement of his opinion -- love-sources is worse than it has ever been. There are two sides to every story and I fear we're only considering one here.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/89621 from yesterday, too. I'll let you folks decide whether that's antagonism or a statement with facts backing it.
I'd call that 'ciaranm being ciaranm' It's not the first time he's taken jabs at the kernel team. Kurt,onefone may not be our most angelic user, I don't know that since I don't know him. What I do know is this. He's not the first complaint we've had about ciaranm and ciaranm has been warned many times in the past to stop antagonizing people. He doesn't stop at it though, he keeps going, and I think that there's a point where we need to finally say "look we've warned you many times, you keep doing it, and here are the consiquences. I'm not saying fire him, I'm saying that he needs to deal with the consiquences of his actions.
Sorry for the late reply. Unfortunately I do have to agree that ciaranm can be a bit much for users sometimes. Some days he can be extremely patient and helpful while other times he can be downright insulting and rude (though in the few times I have witnessed this , I can't say I don't sympathize). As for what to do about this, I am uncertain. I don't know if a suspension will result in him leaving of his own accord or if it will have the desired effect. As I'm only his team lead and not a part of developer relations, I don't know where I weigh into this matter, but I do think something on the magnatude of a suspension may be needed here to get the point across. I'd be more agreeable to an alternative method, but nothing comes to mind.
weeve, You were cc'd on this bug because you are his team lead. The team leads should be aware of problems that are going on with their members outside as well as inside. As to what to do with ciaranm, we're starting to run out of options. It's very obvious that warning him has no effect. I would rather not fire him, As weeve has said, when he does behave so to speak, he does do very well, and he is very patient and helpful, as I have cause to know all too well. However, being overly rude to users and other devs isn't acceptable, and I think that something should be done about it, and I think that that a 30 day suspention may get the point across that we will not put up with antagonizing of users and other devs. Normally I would not suggest such a high time for the suspention to start with, but since he's been warned several times before, and told to stop, I think that this is a good time.
In my opinion, there is a significant difference between name-calling, unprofessional, "in your face" confrontational behavior ("lick my swamp" being the most immediate example) and simply stating one's opinion in a professional manner. ciaranm was told he could no longer mention love-sources in any capacity. I can't even begin to describe how wrong that is. Now we're *CENSORING* what devs can and cannot say? Shall we draft up a list of "approved" and "unapproved" topics and distribute it to the team? Are we no longer allowed to voice a negative opinion of user-maintained projects like love-sources? Again, ciaranm's comment was made in the context of a larger discussion about steel300, lovechild and kernel maintenance in Gentoo. It's not like he set out to pick a fight. In fact, OneofOne wasn't even in the channel when ciaranm made that particular comment. I guess my biggest problem with all this is; I see comments like that from multiple devs and users every single day. That's simply the nature of the project, for right or wrong. Now that we have one particularly thin-skinned user who comes along and complains, we're considering banning someone for 30 days as a result. We're a community-based distribution. That means the line between developer and user is two-way, not one way.
I certainly agree that ciaranm can be quite acerbic. (He and woodchip would have gotten along great, I suspect.) My problem w/ suspending him is that what's been mentioned in this bug doesn't warrant it. I realize that the argument is that there is a long, cumulative body of evidence leading to such a decision, but it is not documented here. The test is fairly simple: show the bug report to somebody who doesn't know ciaranm, and I think you'd have a hard time convincing that person that this report warrants a suspension w/o using phrases such as "pattern of behavior" or "tip of the iceberg". Our standard for any sort of punitive action needs to be "if it isn't documented, it doesn't exist", otherwise how can it be rebutted?
I also think we need to document and articulate exactly what standard developers are being held to. Quite frankly, I think it's my Gentoo-given right to speak my mind about love-sources, GRP, breakmygentoo or whatever else I wish to discuss, as long as I do it in a professional, corteous manner. To be clear: I should be able to say: "Joe User is now maintaining Gentoo's Pet Rock. In my opinion, the Pet Rock has never been in worse shape than it is now." I should not be able to say: "Joe User blows chunks and can lick my swamp. He sucks so hard at maintaining Gentoo's Pet Rock that Hoover took out a patent on him." If this is not the case, someone please say something. --kurt
I agree that a suspension would probably drive him away entirely, which is not the intention here. Neither is the intention to *censor* people, Kurt. I'll comb the logs and find the examples. None by itself is a *big* thing (certainly nothing on the lick my swamp scale). But together, one sees a constant pattern of antagonism towards these people: 13th July: 17:27 <@~seemant> if it's a gentoo coreutils, don't bother them with it 17:27 <+~redeeman> ah ok 17:27 <+~redeeman> but i hate bugzilla :| 17:27 <@~seemant> good, bugzilla's down anyway 17:27 <+~redeeman> todo: write bugzilla frontend 17:27 <@~ciaranm> and i hate you, but you don't see me whining about it in public. much 17:27 <+~redeeman> lol, "much" 17:27 <@~latexer> i can feel the love. 14th July: 07:58 <+~redeeman> rank redeeman 07:58 <@~geoman> GenBot: rank ciaranm 07:58 <+~GenBot> ciaranm has -8 points of karma (rank 391). 07:58 <@~Stuart> j4rg0n: cyfred 07:58 <@~Stuart> ciaranm-- 07:58 <+~redeeman> why wont it rank me? 07:58 <@~geoman> GenBot: rank redeeman 07:58 <@~ciaranm> redeeman: because you're an idiot 07:58 <+~GenBot> redeeman has 26 points of karma (rank 3). Redeeman actually does take all this in stride, anyway.
You did censor him, though. That's never the right way to solve a problem. 16:20 <@seemant> ciaranm: for the immediate term, I need you to stop mentioning love sources or anyone associated with it please 16:20 <@seemant> ciaranm: effective immediately love-sources is, in my opinion, a horrible set of patches. If I say this publicly and oneofone whines, am I going to be censored, too? Again, I'll ask what standard we're holding devs to. I can think of a half-dozen devs off the top of my head who have displayed much worse behavior towards users -- none of them have received a 30-day suspension. Why are we recommending suspension for ciaranm in this case? We're being inconsistent here and, worse, we're overstepping our bounds. Our job is not to tell devs what they may and may not talk about.
notice I said "for the immediate term" -- ie, while things get sorted out, so as not to get more tempers flaring off.
> Our job is not to tell devs what they may and may not talk about. It isn't and I fully agree with you on that - but our job is to ensure devs talk to other developers as they would to users in a courteous, professional manner. Hence, "developer relations". Just because developers are not paid and might not happen to wear a tie while they talk doesn't mean that good courtesy can't happen. We're not trying to, I hope - and we definitely don't want to censor anything. The more discussion, the better - since I hope that it would end up creating a better Gentoo for all. I for one, don't mind Ciaran saying "xyz-sources is worse than a swamp SINCE { Reasons ... } and I think that it should be solved by { Valid resolution strategy ... }" and I see bug reports being filed at the same time from him and I see him trying to solve the issue by kindly talking to the maintainer of xyz-sources. But the antagonism and leeching has to go - saying "Don't use xyz, it blows dogs! <END>" is no good to anyone *unless* you happen to have a just reason for saying that, as well as ideas for making things better - since complaining with little detail to why you're saying so doesn't help the team maintaining xyz, our users or our reputation. Just because zyx is a developer, it doesn't make him or her less of a user. In fact, it is supposed to show that zyx is a user by whose contributions and kind help [s]he was given the *privilege* of being a developer so that [s]he can keep up those contributions. We're a community and what defines Gentoo is how well that community operates. Antagonism doesn't help. Patches, bugs, ideas, and friendly communication will. That's how Gentoo has, does, and will work - or else I wouldn't have, and won't be a developer. Sorry if this is a little long...
I have to agree with Kurt that those little incidences are just that, very little.. Yet I also imagine that for every incident that we see or that gets reported, there are a handful that go unseen. This bug is a good idea, we should just keep collecting these problems and complaints so that they are documented, because at this rate it's only a matter of time before something will need to be done (see today's rant on the -dev mailing list)
So far, I haven't seen a single comment from ciaranm that warrants any punitive action. I'd also like to note that I find the thought of telling devs not to say something sucks when they think it sucks because we're scared to death of hurting the feelings of poor upstream software maintainers. In fact, ciaranm's comments about love-sources may be quite helpful in encouraging people to avoid crap like reiser4, which results in useless bug reports from people who can't understand why we don't need to waste developer resources trying to make everything work on broken & unsupported filesystems (or other software). I just got home and am still sorting myself out here, so don't take this as anything official but rather my personal $0.02.
"I'd also like to note that I find the thought of telling devs not to say something sucks when they think it sucks because we're scared to death of hurting the feelings of poor upstream software maintainers..." + very disturbing. And now I'll avoid posting until I've had a full night's sleep :)
Look, me asking ciaranm to not talk about the love-sources and their authors for the *immediate* term was strictly to avoid getting him and them further into a cycle of viciousness that has been weeks in the making. I believe it is irrelevant whether love-sources suck. Yes, they use reiser4 and whatever else happens to be unstable (and no, I would neither use nor recommend them) -- but the point is that they're filling a demand. So they exist, and people are using them. Now, the understanding that both BMG and love-sources people have always had is that bugs go to *them* not us. Admittedly, a few do bleed over to our camp, but what few do get closed as invalid. Sure, it's a pain, but what isn't? My point, in all this, is not that Ciaranm hates love-sources or the authors -- that is his right, as it is everyone's. My point boils down to him _constantly_ jibing at them. Am I being too sensitive? Or too "paranoid" (can't think of the word) by asking him to put a sock in it for now? Possibly, and if so, I apologise. I'm not wanting to be a censor (yeah yeah, I have been, blah blah) -- I am, however, wanting to not have to put out worse fires later. As an example of his constant jibes -- ciaran will _initiate_ by making statements to them, and then when they're wanting to respond, I've seen him either ignore or leave (I'm not sure if he's kicked anyone). That's not polite, it's quite a lack of etiquette, and quite frankly when it happens in #gentoo and #gentoo-dev, it's indicative of an official stance. (I'd rather thought our stance with BMG and love & co. was more of a hands-off rather than a judgement). Sorry for rambling.
I agree it's not a very polite thing to continue needling them. At the same time, I just don't see how it crosses the line. The only reason he does it is because they react. If they stopped reacting, he'd get bored and move on to something else. I think you can make a good argument for it being juvenille, but I just don't see how it's something that warrants suspension, even if its done on a repeated basis. People needle each other all the time in -dev. Again, I've seen the same (or very similar) sort of behavior from other devs and they haven't received so much as a warning.
I don't think that other devs are taking it to the extent that ciaranm is, I think that's where the difference is. Either that, or they do it in a way that's 1 not blatently obvious, or 2, it's not a constant thing that draws several complaints from people. Other devs don't cause people to disappear for a month after they've pissed someone off to a serious extent, either as ciaranm did once. The other thing is that generally, you can nicely ask people to calm down a little and explain why, and they understand. Ciaranm doesn't do that, he keeps going at people, and all that does is upset people more.
ok, fair enough. I can see your point, even if I don't agree with it. I still oppose any sort of disciplinary action against ciaran for the reasons I've stated previously. That said, I'll respect whatever decision is made by the team as a whole.
"I agree it's not a very polite thing to continue needling them. At the same time, I just don't see how it crosses the line. The only reason he does it is because they react. If they stopped reacting, he'd get bored and move on to something else." I believe that's a pretty good description of a "bully". I'm willing to accept that if a dev continually makes #gentoo-dev an unpleasant place to work, then that's a fair reason to fire (or suspend) a dev. The bar would have to be set awfully high, though, and I would expect a _lot_ of documentation to justify it. I don't think we have enough evidence just yet to pass the "man on the street" test (would the average person, of either gender, unfamiliar w/ the situation, look at the evidence and come to the same conclusion). I would suggest talking to him (again), documenting it, and reopening this bug again in the future if it's warranted.
like I said in comment #11, suspension is probably too much here. I'll close this bug for now while we talk to him (again).
So what ever came of talking to him? He certainly hasn't learned much: <eradicator> gustavoz: did youu need me for something? <ciaranm> eradicator: he needs your butthole <agaffney> ciaranm: come on, we don't need *your* private fantasies in our heads <ciaranm> leave my privates out of this <gustavoz> eradicator: nope, thanks, was looking in which herd it was more logical to put spandsp in <ciaranm> talking of assholes... hi geoman!
Reopening, comment #24.
From looking at the context of comment #24, this came from #gentoo-sparc. Please keep in mind that we typically don't keep people from saying whatever comes to mind unless it's along the lines of something like a personal attack. If you logged everything said in there, you'd probably have to throw out just about the whole sparc team for being potty mouths. However, if there is a larger issue here between Jeremy and Ciaran than what is documented in comment #24, I'd suggest looking into it a little more. I haven't had a chance to look at my IRC logs for today as I'm still at work, but I really don't see this as being intended as being anything more than humor.
This is just a comment, take it as just that. If this is conciddered humor, then well, I don't really find it funny. Especially conciddering that while this may have been said in gentoo-sparc, it's another perfect example of ciaranm's attitude/antagonism. /me goes back to work.
we say things just as bad as that and even worse all the time in -infra. Pick 5 random lines out of that channel, post them here out of context and I'm sure we'll all look like raging jerks. Looking at what ciaranm posted, the person who seems like they might have a reason to be offended the most is geoman. Has anyone bothered to ask if he's upset over this? (or, in fact, if he even remembers ciaranm said it in the first place?) This isn't me defending ciaranm. This is me trying to prevent devrel from taking things a) out of context and b) far too seriously.
again, my comment was just that. a comment. I'm not saying we shoot him over it :) Kurt, I think that the reason it got braught up in the first place, is that it's wellknown he does stuff like this, all the time. (again, this is just a guess, that's all )
Yes, it was on #-sparc, and I understand the looseness of that channel. I wasn't pasting that snippet as a reason we should repremand him, but it did catch my attention as being typical of his character, and I was wondering what came about from seemant talking with him as I've not really noticed a change in his attitude.
closing this -- it's a case of ciaran being ciaran. If people are sincerely affected by it, then we can revisit, but it seems to be a non-issue.
Appending the following links as further examples of odd behaviour, there's a lot more to be added as soon as -core stuff and IRC monkeying is correlated. http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-329544.html http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-2363515.html#2363515
Reopening. Ciaran is at it again. Blog post: http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm/random//20050509.003.shtml Text is as follows, in case the blog post is removed: "And a loser! :: 2005-05-09 21:10:00 [L] Heh. We also have a loser! Looks like someone is busy misinterpreting what I'm saying, again. I have plenty of logs to back up my initial statement. What I didn't bother to keep was logs of, amongst other things, a senior devrel member making allegations about illegal substance abuse by one of our managers, one of our managers making some really offensive remarks about a senior devrel member, several of our managers making claims about the suitability of various managers for their roles and so on."
Just a selection of more complaints: --- Random comments like: > ciaranm solar: heh, not really. x86 is dead, didn't you get the memo? ChanServ +o fiasco stuff: > Fri Feb 4 22:22:14 2005 ChanServ: ciaranm!~ciaranm_@smtp.gentoo.org OP [#gentoo-dev] [-] tantive --- #gentoo-devrel complaint snippets, March 09 2005: (Note that the following is on offical manager's meeting logs which Ciaran does not want posted... due to his comments, maybe?) 22:53 <ian|home> 19:16 ciaranm> Pylon: because, simply put, the forums suck 22:53 <ian|home> 19:17 ciaranm> plus there's the whole "nazi mods stuff" for the foums 22:53 <ian|home> 19:18 ciaranm> a group of arbitrary non-developers who have repeatedly shown themselves to not give a crap what the people who do the actual work think patrol the forums with an iron fist 22:56 < ian|home> i don't care about him being offensive to me. i know that he doesn't like me. but i can hanlde that. i just don't like to see him pushing all our community work into the dirt. 22:56 < tantive> no dev should offend other people of the same project 22:57 < tantive> and at least he shouldn't do that in public 22:58 <@plasmaroo> Well, I did talk to him as did Weeve as did many other DevRel staff in the past year about how his use of language, and I talked to him a few weeks back too, so I guess that wasn't enough. 22:58 < tantive> yeah, from how i understood your query 22:58 <@plasmaroo> Deedra's got class right now, BTW. 22:59 < tantive> if nothing more would have happened devrel would have done nothing, right? 22:59 <@plasmaroo> Yeah, because we thought we didn't have any more problems and that he calmed down. 22:59 <@plasmaroo> He didn't. 22:59 < tantive> yeah 22:59 <@plasmaroo> So, back to stage1 ;) 22:59 < tantive> and i mean 22:59 < tantive> i think he knows that saying this in -meetings wasn't good 22:59 < tantive> but it is too late now Mar 10 00:05:32 <Kugelfang> 23:44 <@Kugelfang> plasmaroo: you can tell him, this a criminal act in germany... Mar 10 00:05:36 <Kugelfang> 23:44 <@Kugelfang> plasmaroo: act of insultion Mar 10 00:17:18 <tantive> the point is that he offends other ppl in official meetings Mar 10 00:17:24 <tantive> and in official irc channels Mar 10 00:17:29 <tantive> thats the point Mar 10 00:17:50 <tantive> if he's not in public he can think and say whatever he wants Mar 10 00:18:04 <tantive> but not as a gentoo dev in the role as a gentoo dev Mar 10 00:18:14 <bit``> ciaranm just needs to learn how to adjust to different social groups. Can't treat every group the same. Mar 10 00:18:19 <tantive> because this behaviour is not good at all for our project -- Complaints received by mail: Received: 05/03/05 2005 13:22 To: devrel@gentoo.org Subject: Ciaran McCreesh G'day devrel, Could you please do something about Ciaran's attitude? It's bad enough when he's pouring slander over fellow devs in closed circles, but that's mostly his own problem. But when he passes from a simple case of lacking manners to spitting venom in the open, he's becoming a burden to the public image of us all. I've seen today that he's taken his long-standing vendetta against pvdabeel and Opensolaris to the forums, and he seems to think he can get away with including me in his campaign now, too: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-329544.html http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-2363515.html#2363515 I will not tolerate being stabbed in the back like this. I don't care about the content of the debate, I will not waste my time answering in that forum thread or directly. My concern is the PR effect of public postings from a Gentoo developer, please make him understand that this type of behaviour is completely inappropriate. Cheers Ulrich Plate -- And another complaint sent to the opensolaris list: From: Jason Wohgemuth <stonent@gmail.com> Date: Tue 26 Apr 2005 23:32:17 CEST To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Cc: Subject: [Opensolaris-discuss] Bring on the sayers of "nay" Reply-To: Jason Wohgemuth <stonent@gmail.com> http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?p=2353190#2353190 Gentoo's favorite Troll in developer's clothing, Ciaran Mccreesh. I got involved when he started bashing Pieter (which is one of his favorite pastimes) But of course this irritated me as well. "You'll be looking forward to it for a long time. There is no Gentoo/OpenSlowaris port planned." Come again? http://www.gentoo.org/news/en/gwn/20050124-newsletter.xml -- Another forums link which SeJo gave us: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-2193388.html -- Warning that was issued and discussion afterwards: Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 20:52:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Deedra Waters <dmwaters@gentoo.org> To: ciaranm@gentoo.org, devrel@gentoo.org Subject: warning. Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505172048450.12228@shell.osuosl.org> Ciaran, We are issuing a formal warning regarding your behaviour (both recent and otherwise) on various communication channels, namely and not limited to the Gentoo IRC channels, the Gentoo Forums, Gentoo mailing lists, and Planet Gentoo. This warning aims to address the following issues in response to multiple complaints from developers who have been offended by your comments and actions: * IRC Channel Abuse We have received various complaints regarding the use of ChanServ OP and DEOP commands on #gentoo-dev. This is a reminder that such actions are inappropriate. * Forums, Planet Gentoo, Gentoo IRC channels and mailing lists Please refrain from making slanderous comments about Gentoo projects and/or Gentoo Developers on the Gentoo Forums. We would also like to remind you that if you have any issues, they can be taken up with the Gentoo Ombudsman or Gentoo Developer Relations. Your extensive record of antagonizing behaviour, especially in public channels such as that in the Gentoo Forums, IRC, any Gentoo mailing lists or Planet Gentoo does not resolve conflicts and only provokes further problems and damages the reputation of the project as a whole. We are also reminding you that your behaviour is on public record as an official Gentoo developer and your actions may hence undermine the credibility of the community and other Gentoo developers/projects. Any further misbehavior will result in a 60 day suspension of all developer privileges and accounts such as forum access, IRC operator privileges, and all accounts on Gentoo Infrastructure. Please see the Gentoo Etiquette [1] document for further details. Thank you. Gentoo Developer Relations. [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=3&chap=2 ### Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 21:35:46 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> To: Deedra Waters <dmwaters@gentoo.org> Cc: devrel@gentoo.org, ombudsman@gentoo.org Subject: Re: warning. Message-ID: <20050518213546.6066849b@snowdrop> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505172048450.12228@shell.osuosl.org> References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505172048450.12228@shell.osuosl.org> On Tue, 17 May 2005 20:52:02 -0700 (PDT) Deedra Waters <dmwaters@gentoo.org> wrote: | We are issuing a formal warning regarding your behaviour (both recent | and otherwise) on various communication channels, namely and not | limited to the Gentoo IRC channels, the Gentoo Forums, Gentoo mailing | lists, and Planet Gentoo. 'We'? Who specifically? You? You as devrel manager? You as a foundation member? You as an individual? All of devrel? Some of devrel? | This warning aims to address the following issues in response to | multiple complaints from developers who have been offended by your | comments and actions: Which developers? Ones which actually do something, or just certain members of the Gentoo/cygwin team who are trying to get me kicked off the project because I pointed out some huge flaws in one of their proposals? I ask, because I haven't received any complaints of the nature you suggest, which makes me think maybe certain people are trying to stir up trouble rather than actually have something which they consider to be a problem fixed. | * IRC Channel Abuse | We have received various complaints regarding the use of | ChanServ OP and DEOP commands on #gentoo-dev. This is a | reminder that such actions are inappropriate. I haven't used the deop command in #gentoo-dev after I was first asked by someone not to. The only time I've used op in #gentoo-dev is on myself. | * Forums, Planet Gentoo, Gentoo IRC channels and mailing lists | Please refrain from making slanderous comments about Gentoo | projects and/or Gentoo Developers on the Gentoo Forums. So that we're clear: slander, n: Any false statement spoken about a person ; calumny. calumny, n: The malicious utterance of false charges or misrepresentation If you could point me to where I have made false statements about Gentoo projects or developers, I would be most interested. I don't go around intentionally lying about Gentoo -- indeed, all of the first-hand feedback that I've received regarding my honesty or lack of it suggests quite the opposite. So, where have I made false statements? If you could be so kind as to explain to me where I've gotten things wrong, I'd be happy to post an update clarifying the issue. | Your extensive record of antagonizing behaviour, especially in public | channels such as that in the Gentoo Forums, IRC, any Gentoo mailing | lists or Planet Gentoo does not resolve conflicts and only provokes | further problems and damages the reputation of the project as a whole. Such grand rhetoric, care to back it up with facts? [ from earlier in the reply ] | We would also like to remind you that if you have any issues, they can | be taken up with the Gentoo Ombudsman or Gentoo Developer Relations. At this point, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming that you merely made a mistake when sending this email. I'm currently Cc:ing the ombudsman for informational purposes only. Now, my request to you. I'm assuming that you intended this email as something done for the good of Gentoo, rather than an exercise in abusing your new-found position to get at people you don't like. So, let me explain what I'd like you to do. I'd like you to rewrite and resend your original email to make it look like the actions of a reasonable adult. Specifically, I'd suggest changes along the following lines: * Stating when and whom I deopped after I had first been asked not to do it. (In case you're not sure, the first time I was asked not to use deop was by devrel -- there was no prior request.) * Pointing out exactly where I've published lies about other Gentoo developers or projects that have drawn complaints from other developers. Or if you prefer, any lies in general -- you may wish to reword an earlier paragraph if you choose this route. * Backing up the 'antagonising behaviour', 'does not resolve conflicts', 'provokes further problems' and 'damages the reputation' claims with facts and examples. You should also contrast this with the times when my habit of asking direct and pertinent questions has prevented massive damage to the tree and the project. You may find it useful to include an explanation of why I am to blame for the inability of certain developers to handle technical criticism of badly thought out ideas in an adult manner. Once you provide me with such an email, I'd be happy to discuss it with you, present my side of the issue and hopefully resolve this. Until you do, however, I'll be left with some doubts (sorry, but unlike some I always consider both possibilities rather than immediately assuming either the best or the worst of someone) as to the motives behind this email and your handling of your new role. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm --Signature_Wed__18_May_2005_21_35_46_+0100_7DY.nXhJI6r+Ojkf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature ### From: Jason Huebel <jhuebel@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo To: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: warning. Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:14:47 -0500 Cc: devrel@gentoo.org, ombudsman@gentoo.org References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505172048450.12228@shell.osuosl.org> <20050518213546.6066849b@snowdrop> In-Reply-To: <20050518213546.6066849b@snowdrop> Message-Id: <200505181814.54239.jhuebel@gentoo.org> On Wednesday 18 May 2005 3:35 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Tue, 17 May 2005 20:52:02 -0700 (PDT) Deedra Waters > > <dmwaters@gentoo.org> wrote: > | We are issuing a formal warning regarding your behaviour (both recent > | and otherwise) on various communication channels, namely and not > | limited to the Gentoo IRC channels, the Gentoo Forums, Gentoo mailing > | lists, and Planet Gentoo. > > 'We'? Who specifically? You? You as devrel manager? You as a foundation > member? You as an individual? All of devrel? Some of devrel? The warning sent by Deedra was sent on behalf of the entire Developer Relations team and has my approval as Developer Relations Lead. The warning is therefore considered "official" and "on the record". > Once you provide me with such an email, I'd be happy to discuss it with > you, present my side of the issue and hopefully resolve this. Until you > do, however, I'll be left with some doubts (sorry, but unlike some I > always consider both possibilities rather than immediately assuming > either the best or the worst of someone) as to the motives behind this > email and your handling of your new role. There is no discussion to be had. Developer Relations has been over this with you a number of times. Therefore, you can either discontinue your antagonistic behaviour-- which you have recognized as such in the past (eg. your assertion that "being an ass" gets you what you want)-- or you can accept a 60 day suspension. Those are your only options. -- Jason Huebel Gentoo Foundation Trustee Gentoo Developer Relations Operational Lead Gentoo Recruiter Gentoo/amd64 Strategic Lead GPG Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=3Dget&search=3D0x9BA9E230 "Do not weep; do not wax indignant. Understand." Baruch Spinoza (1632 - 1677) --nextPart2280888.ZznYDYnogJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature ### Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 00:28:23 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> To: Jason Huebel <jhuebel@gentoo.org> Cc: devrel@gentoo.org, ombudsman@gentoo.org Subject: Re: warning. Message-ID: <20050519002823.5cb6155f@snowdrop> In-Reply-To: <200505181814.54239.jhuebel@gentoo.org> References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505172048450.12228@shell.osuosl.org> <20050518213546.6066849b@snowdrop> <200505181814.54239.jhuebel@gentoo.org> On Wed, 18 May 2005 18:14:47 -0500 Jason Huebel <jhuebel@gentoo.org> wrote: | > Once you provide me with such an email, I'd be happy to discuss it | > with you, present my side of the issue and hopefully resolve this. | > Until you do, however, I'll be left with some doubts (sorry, but | > unlike some I always consider both possibilities rather than | > immediately assuming either the best or the worst of someone) as to | > the motives behind this email and your handling of your new role. | | There is no discussion to be had. Developer Relations has been over | this with you a number of times. No, devrel have repeatedly thrown accusations my way, made threats and then not actually backed up their claims. When pressed, they have then backed away and suddenly gone all quiet and cancelled any threats and action that they originally said that they were going to take. | Therefore, you can either discontinue your antagonistic behaviour-- | which you have recognized as such in the past (eg. your assertion | that "being an ass" gets you what you want)-- or you can accept a 60 | day suspension. Those are your only options. You have yet to actually decide or inform me what my 'antagonistic' behaviour is. And if you're going to try to quote me, do it properly. I did not say that "being an ass gets me what I want". I said that on a few occasions several people *had* to be an ass because it was the only way of preventing far greater damage to Gentoo. Have you forgotten just how much was being broken in those situations and how visible this was to our users? Have you forgotten about how all previous attempts to get these situations fixed utterly failed? So again, I ask. Are devrel trying to act in the best interests of Gentoo, or is this an exercise in throwing around authority? If it's the former, you should start by actually backing up your claims so that I know what it is you'd like me not to do. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm --Signature_Thu__19_May_2005_00_28_23_+0100_yzm_MSM/Qqo3VrDe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature ### From: Jason Huebel <jhuebel@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo To: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: warning. Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 21:01:08 -0500 Cc: devrel@gentoo.org, ombudsman@gentoo.org References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505172048450.12228@shell.osuosl.org> <200505181814.54239.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <20050519002823.5cb6155f@snowdrop> In-Reply-To: <20050519002823.5cb6155f@snowdrop> Message-Id: <200505182101.16244.jhuebel@gentoo.org> On Wednesday 18 May 2005 6:28 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >> On Wed, 18 May 2005 18:14:47 -0500 Jason Huebel <jhuebel@gentoo.org> >> >> wrote: >> | > Once you provide me with such an email, I'd be happy to discuss it >> | > with you, present my side of the issue and hopefully resolve this. >> | > Until you do, however, I'll be left with some doubts (sorry, but >> | > unlike some I always consider both possibilities rather than >> | > immediately assuming either the best or the worst of someone) as to >> | > the motives behind this email and your handling of your new role. >> | >> | There is no discussion to be had. Developer Relations has been over >> | this with you a number of times. >> >> No, devrel have repeatedly thrown accusations my way, made threats and >> then not actually backed up their claims. When pressed, they have then >> backed away and suddenly gone all quiet and cancelled any threats and >> action that they originally said that they were going to take. >> >> | Therefore, you can either discontinue your antagonistic behaviour-- >> | which you have recognized as such in the past (eg. your assertion >> | that "being an ass" gets you what you want)-- or you can accept a 60 >> | day suspension. Those are your only options. >> >> You have yet to actually decide or inform me what my 'antagonistic' >> behaviour is. And if you're going to try to quote me, do it properly. >> I did not say that "being an ass gets me what I want". I said that on a >> few occasions several people *had* to be an ass because it was the only >> way of preventing far greater damage to Gentoo. Have you forgotten just >> how much was being broken in those situations and how visible this was >> to our users? Have you forgotten about how all previous attempts to get >> these situations fixed utterly failed? >> >> So again, I ask. Are devrel trying to act in the best interests of >> Gentoo, or is this an exercise in throwing around authority? If it's the >> former, you should start by actually backing up your claims so that I >> know what it is you'd like me not to do. Here are a few examples. In fairness, there are some complaints which were not backed up by logs or copies of emails, so I'm not including those here. However, these examples show a pattern of behaviour that is unacceptable, has been discussed with you more than once and most stop immediately. Here are three recent examples, the first being the most agregious in my mind and the example that has sparked this warning: 1. http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm/random//20050509.003.shtml - The most difficult thing to ignore is the public forum in which this was posted. It's okay to air greivances on gentoo-core, but planet is NOT an appropriate forum. Secondly, the unsubstantiated accusation about drug abuse should not be aired in public. If you suspect someone has a drug problem, your first instinct should be to contact Developer Relations, the developer's manager or a Trustee to get that person some help. 2. http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-2363515.html#2363515 - Again, this is a public forum and shows a lack of professionalism. You are an official Gentoo developer and therefore are view by users as a voice of the Gentoo community. 3. http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-329544.html - Another example of a public forum where you named a (former) developer and bashed that person. I can't comment on drobbins management since I came in to Gentoo shortly before he left, but that doesn't negate the fact that this was an unprofessional comment. Examples from the past that show a pattern of unacceptable behaviour include: 1. IRC comments which were inappropriate and directed at people who didn't appreciate them. For example: Around the 5th October 2004: <eradicator> gustavoz: did youu need me for something? <ciaranm> eradicator: he needs your butthole <agaffney> ciaranm: come on, we don't need *your* private fantasies in our heads <ciaranm> leave my privates out of this <gustavoz> eradicator: nope, thanks, was looking in which herd it was more logical to put spandsp in <ciaranm> talking of assholes... hi geoman! 13th July 2004: 17:27 <@~seemant> if it's a gentoo coreutils, don't bother them with it 17:27 <+~redeeman> ah ok 17:27 <+~redeeman> but i hate bugzilla :| 17:27 <@~seemant> good, bugzilla's down anyway 17:27 <+~redeeman> todo: write bugzilla frontend 17:27 <@~ciaranm> and i hate you, but you don't see me whining about it in public. much 17:27 <+~redeeman> lol, "much" 17:27 <@~latexer> i can feel the love. 14th July 2004: 07:58 <+~redeeman> rank redeeman 07:58 <@~geoman> GenBot: rank ciaranm 07:58 <+~GenBot> ciaranm has -8 points of karma (rank 391). 07:58 <@~Stuart> j4rg0n: cyfred 07:58 <@~Stuart> ciaranm-- 07:58 <+~redeeman> why wont it rank me? 07:58 <@~geoman> GenBot: rank redeeman 07:58 <@~ciaranm> redeeman: because you're an idiot 07:58 <+~GenBot> redeeman has 26 points of karma (rank 3). Around 16th July 2004: <OneOfOne> hello, i'm really sorry but this is too much <OneOfOne> he attacks me personally and dont even have the guts to talk directly to me <OneOfOne> <ciaranm> so now we have oneofone maintaining love-, and it's worse than ever <OneOfOne> btw i didnt even talk to him before he started attacking me and last time i even talked about reiser4/love-sources on #gentoo was weeks ago, i'm on a break of it because of my college exams So, you're antagonizing developers, being unprofessional in public forums and failing to make the necessary adjustments to avoid further problems. It puts Developer Relations in a very difficult position when we're required to spend the amount of time we have to address issues with a single developer. The Gentoo community appreciates your work, but if it comes with the price of antagonizing your fellow developers then you diminish your value to the community. Again, the warning previously emailed to you is official. If things don't change immediately, you'll be suspended for 60 days. This isn't a disciplinary action that is taken lightly. -- Jason Huebel Gentoo Foundation Trustee Gentoo Developer Relations Operational Lead Gentoo Recruiter Gentoo/amd64 Strategic Lead GPG Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9BA9E230 "Do not weep; do not wax indignant. Understand." Baruch Spinoza (1632 - 1677) ### Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 03:49:24 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> To: Jason Huebel <jhuebel@gentoo.org> Cc: devrel@gentoo.org, ombudsman@gentoo.org Subject: Re: warning. Message-ID: <20050519034924.6e9de2d2@snowdrop> In-Reply-To: <200505182101.16244.jhuebel@gentoo.org> References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505172048450.12228@shell.osuosl.org> <200505181814.54239.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <20050519002823.5cb6155f@snowdrop> <200505182101.16244.jhuebel@gentoo.org> On Wed, 18 May 2005 21:01:08 -0500 Jason Huebel <jhuebel@gentoo.org> wrote: | 1. http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm/random//20050509.003.shtml - The | most difficult thing to ignore is the public forum in which this was | posted. It's okay to air greivances on gentoo-core, but planet is | NOT an appropriate forum. Secondly, the unsubstantiated accusation | about drug abuse should not be aired in public. If you suspect | someone has a drug problem, your first instinct should be to contact | Developer Relations, the developer's manager or a Trustee to get that | person some help. I'm not the one claiming that someone has a drug problem. That was avenj making that claim, specifically: <avenj> pvdabeel's on crack <avenj> anybody who's been here more than two years knows that If you'd like me to update that post with the actual quotes to which I was referring I could do so -- I've still got some of them left in unclosed irssi windows. Here're another one I was talking about in that post: <johnm> deedra camn be a complete bitch <johnm> shes the one person I actually dislike having to deal with Now perhaps you're starting to see why I'm refraining from posting too much in public. So we get back to the original point. The warning I was sent was about 'slander'. Was anything I wrote in the above link untrue? Or would you like to amend the warning to say "things devrel would rather that the Gentoo user and developer community didn't hear about"? And for your information, I've received lots of user feedback about that and the related planet postings, all of it positive. The only complaint I received was from someone saying that he'd heard that someone else wasn't too comfortable with seeing the truth about certain press releases being published. | 2. http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-2363515.html#2363515 - Again, | this is a public forum and shows a lack of professionalism. You are | an official Gentoo developer and therefore are view by users as a | voice of the Gentoo community. And the GWN is viewed by the users as an official Gentoo publication. Despite this, they continue to publish unresearched, unverified statements (for example, they claim that we have an opensolaris port) and give out advice that will result in users having broken systems. They have also on several occasions posted links to incomplete 'testing only' projects and encouraged users to give them ago, against the wishes of the projects' maintainers. I and several others have had to deal with huge amounts of worthless "why doesn't foo do blah yet?" and "foo broke my system!" feedback because of this. So, again, I'd say that that comment was entirely fair. | 3. http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-329544.html - Another example | of a public forum where you named a (former) developer and bashed | that person. I can't comment on drobbins management since I came in | to Gentoo shortly before he left, but that doesn't negate the fact | that this was an unprofessional comment. What did I say in that thread that was untrue? Or is your warning again changing from "slander" to "things certain people don't want to be made public"? And, if this is the case, do you consider it appropriate for Gentoo's PR to be based around lies? | Examples from the past that show a pattern of unacceptable behaviour | include: | | 1. IRC comments which were inappropriate and directed at people who | didn't appreciate them. For example: | | Around the 5th October 2004: | <eradicator> gustavoz: did youu need me for something? | <ciaranm> eradicator: he needs your butthole | <agaffney> ciaranm: come on, we don't need *your* private fantasies in | our heads | <ciaranm> leave my privates out of this | <gustavoz> eradicator: nope, thanks, was looking in which herd it was | more logical to put spandsp in | <ciaranm> talking of assholes... hi geoman! Who out of that didn't appreciate my comments? I was under the impression that everyone in the discussion had a sense of humour. And, if you really think that that was inappropriate, would you like me to give you logs of all the similar remarks that have been made as a joke by dozens of other developers? | 13th July 2004: | 17:27 <@~seemant> if it's a gentoo coreutils, don't bother them with | it 17:27 <+~redeeman> ah ok | 17:27 <+~redeeman> but i hate bugzilla :| | 17:27 <@~seemant> good, bugzilla's down anyway | 17:27 <+~redeeman> todo: write bugzilla frontend | 17:27 <@~ciaranm> and i hate you, but you don't see me whining about | it in public. much | 17:27 <+~redeeman> lol, "much" | 17:27 <@~latexer> i can feel the love. Again, redeeman appeared to find that amusing. Was it him that complained? | 14th July 2004: | 07:58 <+~redeeman> rank redeeman | 07:58 <@~geoman> GenBot: rank ciaranm | 07:58 <+~GenBot> ciaranm has -8 points of karma (rank 391). | 07:58 <@~Stuart> j4rg0n: cyfred | 07:58 <@~Stuart> ciaranm-- | 07:58 <+~redeeman> why wont it rank me? | 07:58 <@~geoman> GenBot: rank redeeman | 07:58 <@~ciaranm> redeeman: because you're an idiot | 07:58 <+~GenBot> redeeman has 26 points of karma (rank 3). Would you like me to justify my statement that redeeman is an idiot? Because if you really want, I've got plenty of material to back it up. Most of it revolves around the claim he made last year about "reiser4 being more stable than ext3". Plus, redeeman is not a Gentoo developer or project, which is what your original warning was about. | Around 16th July 2004: | <OneOfOne> hello, i'm really sorry but this is too much | <OneOfOne> he attacks me personally and dont even have the guts to | talk directly to me | <OneOfOne> <ciaranm> so now we have oneofone maintaining love-, and | it's worse than ever | <OneOfOne> btw i didnt even talk to him before he started attacking me | and last time i even talked about reiser4/love-sources on #gentoo was | weeks ago, i'm on a break of it because of my college exams If you take *any* of that guy's remarks at face value you're sadly misguided. I stand by my statement that oneofone made love-sources worse than anyone else. He's the only one that I'm aware of that managed to put out a release which would panic on boot on every single system. Do you have any material to counter this and indicate that any of his predecessors to make an even bigger mess of it? Or would you like to amend your warning from "slander" to "telling users in #gentoo to not use kernels which would break their systems"? I have yet to see you point to any "slanderous comments" about Gentoo developers or projects. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm --Signature_Thu__19_May_2005_03_49_24_+0100_1GYDlLyoDGfl5ZS/ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature ### Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 20:38:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Deedra Waters <dmwaters@gentoo.org> To: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> Cc: Jason Huebel <jhuebel@gentoo.org>, devrel@gentoo.org, ombudsman@gentoo.org Subject: Re: warning. In-Reply-To: <20050519034924.6e9de2d2@snowdrop> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505182015570.12228@shell.osuosl.org> References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505172048450.12228@shell.osuosl.org> <200505181814.54239.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <20050519002823.5cb6155f@snowdrop> <200505182101.16244.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <20050519034924.6e9de2d2@snowdrop> To put things simpley, constant remarks and posts like the ones listed upset people a great deal, and in the past several months, they have become more and more frequent. Ciaranm, if it was just 1 comment by itself, we would not be having this discussion. It's a lot of comments, over the past several months, and there's only so much of that that can be tollerated. When developers start coming to us, asking us to do something about you because of how you treat people, and because of what you say about gentoo projects, there's a point where we need to draw the line. Everyone who has complained has also said that you're a really good developer for gentoo, but that you have no respect for other devs and users. Your public statements may be true, but the reality is that devs are getting more and more tired of them, and some of them are ready to leave if something isn't done about it. ### Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 04:56:23 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> To: Deedra Waters <dmwaters@gentoo.org> Cc: Jason Huebel <jhuebel@gentoo.org>, devrel@gentoo.org, ombudsman@gentoo.org Subject: Re: warning. Message-ID: <20050519045623.0a686d7f@snowdrop> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505182015570.12228@shell.osuosl.org> References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505172048450.12228@shell.osuosl.org> <200505181814.54239.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <20050519002823.5cb6155f@snowdrop> <200505182101.16244.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <20050519034924.6e9de2d2@snowdrop> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505182015570.12228@shell.osuosl.org> On Wed, 18 May 2005 20:38:38 -0700 (PDT) Deedra Waters <dmwaters@gentoo.org> wrote: | Everyone who has complained has also said that you're a really good | developer for gentoo, but that you have no respect for other devs and | users. Now that's completely untrue. I respect the people who have earned respect, and disrespect the deadweights and people who repeatedly break things who haven't had the decency to stay out of the way. | Your public statements may be true, but the reality is that devs are | getting more and more tired of them, and some of them are ready to | leave if something isn't done about it. Ok, so now we're getting somewhere. Why you didn't just say that in the first place rather than making up a load of "trying to sound official" crap is beyond me. So did you suggest to the developers in question that a more productive approach might be to help out on making Gentoo publications and press releases more honest? Or do you prefer sending out threatening and unsubstantiated emails with a big official signature rather than actually working to get things fixed? So, would you like to try redoing your original email and getting it right this time? -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm --Signature_Thu__19_May_2005_04_56_23_+0100_mrTbNfEXl7Gvw2Fk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature ### <branch> From: "Alex Howells" <astinus@gentoo.org> To: <ciaranm@gentoo.org>, <devrel@gentoo.org> Cc: <ombudsman@gentoo.org> Subject: FW: warning. Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 05:22:37 +0100 Message-ID: <E1DYcYS-000769-83@aber.ac.uk> Dear Ciaran, I've been following the current debacle with interest, and to be frank, the warning issued by Developer Relations was precisely that - a warning that should current trends continue, action (suspension for 60 days) will happen. Your initial reply asked for evidence, which was provided in good faith to substantiate the earlier warning. Such evidence was not meant to prove every complaint, simply to show a pattern of behaviour which is unacceptable and has been happening over an extended period. Here are the raw, basic, undisputable facts: -- Numerous complaints have been received from multiple parties. -- You have a somewhat fiery attitude, and are intelligent/opinionated. What is somewhat disappointing is your unwillingness to just accept the warning now evidence has been sent. Your further replies indicate solely that you're seeking a loophole, exploiting every nuance possible to shift blame from 'Ciaran the developer who may have an attitude problem' across to 'Evil, bad, power hungry and sadistic Developer Relations'. A previous e-mail finished as follows: "I have yet to see you point to any "slanderous comments" about Gentoo developers or projects." I'd like to reference you to the following forum thread: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-329544.html Quote from the thread: 'We've had press coverage... Gentoo interviews tend to be either with the relevant manager (for genuine projects) or with pvdabeel (for hyped up bullshit that will never get anywhere). <snip>' Another fact: pvdabeel is a current Gentoo Developer. Your remarks in a public forum clearly attempt to damage his reputation, are blatantly slanderous, and in a larger sense, they damage the reputation of Gentoo. Please let me know how your comment above isn't slanderous/libellous. Your last email suggested we (Developer Relations) might like to rewrite the original warning to 'get it right'. While you might be on the right track in suggesting a more coordinated effort to disseminate material to the public, the warning is just as formal/official as it was before and still stands. Kind Regards, Alex Howells (Astinus) ### Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 05:42:57 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> To: "Alex Howells" <astinus@gentoo.org> Cc: ombudsman@gentoo.org, devrel@gentoo.org Subject: Re: warning. Message-ID: <20050519054257.06eaf5c3@snowdrop> In-Reply-To: <E1DYcX9-00072j-9F@aber.ac.uk> References: <20050519034924.6e9de2d2@snowdrop> <E1DYcX9-00072j-9F@aber.ac.uk> On Thu, 19 May 2005 05:21:17 +0100 "Alex Howells" <astinus@gentoo.org> wrote: | Your initial reply asked for evidence, which was provided in good | faith to substantiate the earlier warning. Such evidence was not meant | to prove every complaint, simply to show a pattern of behaviour which | is unacceptable and has been happening over an extended period. Such evidence did not substantiate any of the initial claim. Which is unsurprising, because the initial claim was insubstantiable. | What is somewhat disappointing is your unwillingness to just accept | the warning now evidence has been sent. Your further replies indicate | solely that you're seeking a loophole, exploiting every nuance | possible to shift blame from 'Ciaran the developer who may have an | attitude problem' across to 'Evil, bad, power hungry and sadistic | Developer Relations'. I won't accept the warning because it's simply not true. There may be legitimate complaints that could be made about me, but the ones that were in the original email we not. I refuse to accept that kind of abuse from people who are in a position of responsibility, especially considering their past actions. | Quote from the thread: | 'We've had press coverage... Gentoo interviews tend to be either with | the relevant manager (for genuine projects) or with pvdabeel (for | hyped up bullshit that will never get anywhere). <snip>' | | Another fact: pvdabeel is a current Gentoo Developer. Your remarks in | a public forum clearly attempt to damage his reputation, are blatantly | slanderous, and in a larger sense, they damage the reputation of | Gentoo. How are they slanderous? I can provide you with an extensive list of hyped up bullshit that hasn't gotten anywhere that pvdabeel has been whoring out in interviews. | Please let me know how your comment above isn't slanderous/libellous. As far as I'm concerned, it's the truth. Where is our opensolaris port? Where is pathspec? Where is our cygwin port? Don't want to take my word for it? See Stuart's blog post, or Brian's, or Jon's comments in that irc log he likes to wave around. The only lies in this have been Gentoo's press releases, and promising something which we can't deliver is about the one worst thing that can happen to Gentoo reputation-wise. Look at how much stick Debian (probably the most similar open source project to us) are getting for not being able to get a promised release out. Or the way that Hurd has gone from being "something with potential" to "something that is mocked by all for not delivering". Would you like us to end up being viewed the same way? | Your last email suggested we (Developer Relations) might like to | rewrite the original warning to 'get it right'. While you might be on | the right track in suggesting a more coordinated effort to disseminate | material to the public, the warning is just as formal/official as it | was before and still stands. And it's still utterly unfounded and an abuse of devrel's position. I'm not claiming that devrel have absolutely nothing on me -- dmwaters might actually be starting to get around to something that can be discussed constructively -- merely that the original warning that was sent was utterly inappropriate, and that I'm hoping that I can get this resolved via devrel rather than having to bring in the ombudsman or management. Devrel *are* in this to get a satisfactory resolution, and aren't just trying to avoid loss of face, right? -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm --Signature_Thu__19_May_2005_05_42_57_+0100_OJ5Jkqgv6E57Mazn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature ### From: Jason Huebel <jhuebel@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo To: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: warning. Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 03:55:10 -0500 Cc: ombudsman@gentoo.org, devrel@gentoo.org References: <20050519034924.6e9de2d2@snowdrop> <E1DYcX9-00072j-9F@aber.ac.uk> <20050519054257.06eaf5c3@snowdrop> In-Reply-To: <20050519054257.06eaf5c3@snowdrop> On Wednesday 18 May 2005 11:42 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >> | What is somewhat disappointing is your unwillingness to just accept >> | the warning now evidence has been sent. Your further replies indicate >> | solely that you're seeking a loophole, exploiting every nuance >> | possible to shift blame from 'Ciaran the developer who may have an >> | attitude problem' across to 'Evil, bad, power hungry and sadistic >> | Developer Relations'. >> >> I won't accept the warning because it's simply not true. There may be >> legitimate complaints that could be made about me, but the ones that >> were in the original email we not. I refuse to accept that kind of abuse >> from people who are in a position of responsibility, especially >> considering their past actions. Whether you accept the warning or not is absolutely irrelevant. The warning has been given. It is what it is. >> | Quote from the thread: >> | 'We've had press coverage... Gentoo interviews tend to be either with >> | the relevant manager (for genuine projects) or with pvdabeel (for >> | hyped up bullshit that will never get anywhere). <snip>' >> | >> | Another fact: pvdabeel is a current Gentoo Developer. Your remarks in >> | a public forum clearly attempt to damage his reputation, are blatantly >> | slanderous, and in a larger sense, they damage the reputation of >> | Gentoo. >> >> How are they slanderous? I can provide you with an extensive list of >> hyped up bullshit that hasn't gotten anywhere that pvdabeel has been >> whoring out in interviews. This comment continues to prove our point. The only positive difference is that it isn't in public. >> | Please let me know how your comment above isn't slanderous/libellous. >> >> As far as I'm concerned, it's the truth. Where is our opensolaris port? >> Where is pathspec? Where is our cygwin port? >> >> Don't want to take my word for it? See Stuart's blog post, or Brian's, >> or Jon's comments in that irc log he likes to wave around. >> >> The only lies in this have been Gentoo's press releases, and promising >> something which we can't deliver is about the one worst thing that can >> happen to Gentoo reputation-wise. Look at how much stick Debian >> (probably the most similar open source project to us) are getting for >> not being able to get a promised release out. Or the way that Hurd has >> gone from being "something with potential" to "something that is mocked >> by all for not delivering". Would you like us to end up being viewed the >> same way? You continue to duck the key issue. That is your disregard for etiquette, your public disrespect for Gentoo developers and projects (whether they turn out to be vapourware or not) and you failure to admit or accept that you have a serious attitude problem. >> | Your last email suggested we (Developer Relations) might like to >> | rewrite the original warning to 'get it right'. While you might be on >> | the right track in suggesting a more coordinated effort to disseminate >> | material to the public, the warning is just as formal/official as it >> | was before and still stands. >> >> And it's still utterly unfounded and an abuse of devrel's position. I'm >> not claiming that devrel have absolutely nothing on me -- dmwaters might >> actually be starting to get around to something that can be discussed >> constructively -- merely that the original warning that was sent was >> utterly inappropriate, and that I'm hoping that I can get this resolved >> via devrel rather than having to bring in the ombudsman or management. >> Devrel *are* in this to get a satisfactory resolution, and aren't just >> trying to avoid loss of face, right? As you'll notice, the ombudsman has been CC'd on all correspondence thus far. And as for management, the managers are already well represented within the Developer Relations team. The resolution to this matter consists of two concrete changes: 1. Stop antagonizing fellow developers or Gentoo users. 2. Cease making inflammatory or provocative comments in Gentoo's public forums, on Planet, or in IRC. Once more, there is no room for discussion on this. The point has been reach where your behaviour can no longer be tolerated. Take responsibility for yourself and make it your goal to make positive changes. Being a Gentoo developer is a privilege, not an irrevocable right. When it comes down to it, if your blatant disregard for others will cost Gentoo the loss of developers, then you will have to be the one who is cut. -- Jason Huebel Gentoo Foundation Trustee Gentoo Developer Relations Operational Lead Gentoo Recruiter Gentoo/amd64 Strategic Lead GPG Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=3Dget&search=3D0x9BA9E230 "Do not weep; do not wax indignant. Understand." Baruch Spinoza (1632 - 1677) --nextPart1425029.OhzgUPjrJ1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature ### Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 10:10:39 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> To: Jason Huebel <jhuebel@gentoo.org> Cc: ombudsman@gentoo.org, devrel@gentoo.org Subject: Re: warning. Message-ID: <20050519101039.4b0646ef@snowdrop> In-Reply-To: <200505190355.19084.jhuebel@gentoo.org> References: <20050519034924.6e9de2d2@snowdrop> <E1DYcX9-00072j-9F@aber.ac.uk> <20050519054257.06eaf5c3@snowdrop> <200505190355.19084.jhuebel@gentoo.org> On Thu, 19 May 2005 03:55:10 -0500 Jason Huebel <jhuebel@gentoo.org> wrote: | Once more, there is no room for discussion on this. Very well. If that is your attitude, I will end my discussion with devrel on this matter. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm --Signature_Thu__19_May_2005_10_10_39_+0100_3IEj+yQk0pwerB.c Content-Type: application/pgp-signature ### <another branch> Message-ID: <428C26A0.7050806@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 22:39:44 -0700 From: Corey Shields <cshields@gentoo.org> To: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> CC: devrel@gentoo.org Subject: Re: warning. References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505172048450.12228@shell.osuosl.org> <200505181814.54239.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <20050519002823.5cb6155f@snowdrop> <200505182101.16244.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <20050519034924.6e9de2d2@snowdrop> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505182015570.12228@shell.osuosl.org> <20050519045623.0a686d7f@snowdrop> In-Reply-To: <20050519045623.0a686d7f@snowdrop> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >Ok, so now we're getting somewhere. Why you didn't just say that in the >first place rather than making up a load of "trying to sound official" >crap is beyond me. So did you suggest to the developers in question that >a more productive approach might be to help out on making Gentoo >publications and press releases more honest? Or do you prefer sending >out threatening and unsubstantiated emails with a big official signature >rather than actually working to get things fixed? The issue at hand is not typically the content or purpose of what you say, it is how you say it. Regardless of your what your intentions may be, a lot of people interpret what you say to them as being very disrespectful and insulting. Those are the complaints we get. The etiquette policy is to "Be nice and respectful of everybody" (no exceptions are given). For example, if someone makes an error in the tree and you want to help rectify the problem and educate the developer about what he did wrong, that can be done in a non-insulting way. And, when that is done respectfully, then that developer has no grounds for a complaint to devrel. Again, it's not what you are saying, but how you are saying it. When complaints are brought to us about things you have said, we can not justify the content of what you said (like you ask for in the quote above) if it is done disrespectfully, because how it was said is against the etiquette policy to begin with. Do it with respect, and I'll be the first in line to back you up. If there is a personal problem you have with an individual, that should be discussed with that individual or brought up with ombudsman rather than taking it out on that individual in public. This goes back to the respect issue. Nobody is out to kick you off the team. You make a good contribution to the distribution, along with a lot of innovation (kudos for the election graphs, for one). What we are asking for is for you to show some more respect for everyone in Gentoo's public forums (irc, forums, bugs, etc). I think the general feeling is that this has been asked before to no avail, hence the "warning". If things change, great, we can all move forward, the complaints will naturally stop, and this becomes a dead issue. -Corey -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team and Devrel Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields ### Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 06:55:11 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> To: Corey Shields <cshields@gentoo.org> Cc: devrel@gentoo.org, ombudsman@gentoo.org Subject: Re: warning. Message-ID: <20050519065511.759d7abf@snowdrop> In-Reply-To: <428C26A0.7050806@gentoo.org> References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505172048450.12228@shell.osuosl.org> <200505181814.54239.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <20050519002823.5cb6155f@snowdrop> <200505182101.16244.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <20050519034924.6e9de2d2@snowdrop> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505182015570.12228@shell.osuosl.org> <20050519045623.0a686d7f@snowdrop> <428C26A0.7050806@gentoo.org> On Wed, 18 May 2005 22:39:44 -0700 Corey Shields <cshields@gentoo.org> wrote: | For example, if someone makes an error in the tree and you want to | help rectify the problem and educate the developer about what he did | wrong, that can be done in a non-insulting way. And, when that is | done respectfully, then that developer has no grounds for a complaint | to devrel. Again, it's not what you are saying, but how you are | saying it. When complaints are brought to us about things you have | said, we can not justify the content of what you said (like you ask | for in the quote above) if it is done disrespectfully, because how it | was said is against the etiquette policy to begin with. Do it with | respect, and I'll be the first in line to back you up. And you'll find (or you would, if you cared to look) that when other developers ask, I'm more than happy to help. And, when they break things, I'm more than happy to help them fix things. The people I treat bluntly (or however you care to spin it) are those that repeatedly break things, refuse to fix them, claim that they didn't break anything, claim that it's repoman's fault, claim that it's the docs' fault or generally do anything they can to weasel their way out of it. But then, the people I help and that are thankful for it don't go around making a big fuss about it. | If there is a personal problem you have with an individual, that | should be discussed with that individual or brought up with ombudsman | rather than taking it out on that individual in public. This goes | back to the respect issue. Been there, tried that. Worked reeeeaaaaalllllllyyy well for the macos mess, for example... | Nobody is out to kick you off the team. You make a good contribution | to the distribution, along with a lot of innovation (kudos for the | election graphs, for one). What we are asking for is for you to show | some more respect for everyone in Gentoo's public forums (irc, | forums, bugs, etc). I think the general feeling is that this has | been asked before to no avail, hence the "warning". If things | change, great, we can all move forward, the complaints will naturally | stop, and this becomes a dead issue. So, again, why didn't the warning say that? Is devrel incapable of saying what mean? Must everything be a pointless exercise in wang waving? When are you going to get around to retracting the original warning and trying again with something more appropriate? -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm --Signature_Thu__19_May_2005_06_55_11_+0100_WsEQ_YrBhnHw.H7j Content-Type: application/pgp-signature ### Message-ID: <428C909B.1020000@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 06:11:55 -0700 From: Corey Shields <cshields@gentoo.org> To: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> CC: devrel@gentoo.org Subject: Re: warning. References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505172048450.12228@shell.osuosl.org> <200505181814.54239.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <20050519002823.5cb6155f@snowdrop> <200505182101.16244.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <20050519034924.6e9de2d2@snowdrop> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505182015570.12228@shell.osuosl.org> <20050519045623.0a686d7f@snowdrop> <428C26A0.7050806@gentoo.org> <20050519065511.759d7abf@snowdrop> In-Reply-To: <20050519065511.759d7abf@snowdrop> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >And you'll find (or you would, if you cared to look) that when other >developers ask, I'm more than happy to help. And, when they break >things, I'm more than happy to help them fix things. The people I treat >bluntly (or however you care to spin it) are those that repeatedly break >things, refuse to fix them, claim that they didn't break anything, claim >that it's repoman's fault, claim that it's the docs' fault or generally >do anything they can to weasel their way out of it. Again, I said there are no exceptions to "Be nice and respectful of everybody". You are making exceptions. Therein lies the problem. >So, again, why didn't the warning say that? Is devrel incapable of >saying what mean? Must everything be a pointless exercise in wang >waving? When are you going to get around to retracting the original >warning and trying again with something more appropriate? Quit trying to weasel your way out of the situation at hand.. This isn't about the way that this has been delivered to you. This is about your behavior. And your reluctance to cooperate, even after further discussion, is only going to make things worse. -C ### End Thread
Created attachment 59478 [details] 20050506 DevRel meeting log
http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm/random//20050601.001.shtml This url was given to me by a dev who finds this offensive and says that this is an example of ciaranm's not wanting to work with people.
FYI, stuart is on the verge of leaving because of how ciaranm is behaving. I've convinced him to file a complaint about what ever is bothering him with ciaranm, but I suspect that he's going to end up leaving because of him. Personally, i think that this is going to be really bad. I don't not want to loose a vallueable dev because of ciaranm.
I'm calling for final comments on the devrel@g.o thread. All comments should be in by midnight UTC on Thursday. We'll have a meeting on Friday and make a decision.
My email to devrel@g.o: "OK guys... It's that time again.
My email to devrel@g.o: "OK guys... It's that time again. We need to have another devrel meeting. There's only one agenda item and I'm sure you guys can all guess what it is. Please see bug #57300 and get up to speed. All comments for bug #57300 and the devrel@g.o thread should be in by Thursday at midnight UTC. The meeting will be held at 1700UTC on Friday. If you can't make the meeting, please provide an up or down vote via email after Thursday at midnight UTC on whether you feel suspension is warranted for Ciaran. Make that vote by replying to this email please."
(In reply to comment #36) > http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm/random//20050601.001.shtml > This url was given to me by a dev who finds this offensive > and says that this is an example of ciaranm's not wanting to work with people. I assume that the offensive statement is the last sentence?
I think that it's more the gwn stuff. Personally, if he doesn't want to be featured dev of the week, he doesn't have to. but the impression i get is the person who gave me that url doesn't like the gwn bashing so to speak.
Attaching the suspension notice for completeness. >>> Ciaran- I'm sending you this email to inform you of your 60 day suspension from all Gentoo projects effective immediately. Your latest mail to the gentoo-core list and the abuse of #gentoo-uk was the last straw. Purposely attacking another member of the Gentoo project will not be tolerated. After your suspension period is over, you may return to Gentoo as a developer by contacting devrel@gentoo.org. Mike Doty Gentoo/AMD64 Lead Gentoo Developer Relations
He's been reinstated. Closing this bug.