| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6051
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2020 11:39 am Post subject: |
 |
|
User: asturm
Topic: Default 'sys-fs/eudev' for New Installs
Post: post 8490496
Reason: totally inappropriate behaviour by a Dev. When is the CoC going to be upheld
[After rereading the reported post a few times, I do not see this as a Code of Conduct violation. It's clearly confrontational, and I suppose you could argue that it qualifies as insulting/derogatory comments for the opening sentence[1], but particularly given the delay in reporting, I'm inclined to interpret the remark narrowly as a crude criticism of the argument to which asturm was responding, not as an insult to the person who made that argument. That said, I would appreciate if the developers would put a bit more effort into being polite, so that the moderators do not keep getting pulled into these arguments. -Hu]
[1]: | asturm wrote: | | I have a low threshold for BS. |
_________________
| Quote: | | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Anon-E-moose
Watchman
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 6103
Location: Dallas area
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2020 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Filling the report area with silly reports, in some type of attempt to get back at the mods/admins and certain other posters, should be cause for a timeout, IMO.
That's just so childish, it's not even funny.
_________________
PRIME x570-pro, 3700x, 6.1 zen kernel
gcc 13, profile 17.0 (custom bare multilib), openrc, wayland |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asturm
Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 8938
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2020 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Anon-E-moose wrote: | | Filling the report area with silly reports |
Does that mean you agree with me there is such a thing as a frivolous report?
| Naib wrote: | Post: post 8490496
Reason: totally inappropriate behaviour by a Dev. When is the CoC going to be upheld |
Dismissed. The only thing that is being discussed there is whether a user can claim their system was broken by running an unsupported configuration (as announced in a previous news item) in the first place. Still, that case was used to construct some 'rich history'. Litigating the technical merits is entirely beside the point there.
Frankly, you are abusing the report function to inflate your poor arguments. You could have avoided it in this case by getting the context. Just like that other time you had a very strong opinion.
| Hu wrote: | | That said, I would appreciate if the developers would put a bit more effort into being polite, so that the moderators do not keep getting pulled into these arguments. -Hu] |
The wiggle room for politeness sometimes just isn't there, especially when people get involved who almost exclusively enter threads in the middle of a discussion with politically laden drive-by posts.
Last edited by asturm on Sat Dec 19, 2020 9:58 pm; edited 4 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6051
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2020 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Anon-E-moose wrote: | Filling the report area with silly reports, in some type of attempt to get back at the mods/admins and certain other posters, should be cause for a timeout, IMO.
That's just so childish, it's not even funny. |
Incorrect. We have users providing potential workarounds while still giving the user the choice they want. To dismiss it this way because it does not align with what another would do is not inclusive or even considering why such an approach was needed in the 1st place
_________________
| Quote: | | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mgorny
Developer
Joined: 27 Apr 2007
Posts: 83
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AlexJGreen
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Sep 2018
Posts: 149
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 10:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Report without proofs looks like attack. Mods, please ban this man
[A report without adequate support would lead to push back from the responding moderator or a warning if it seemed that the report was made in bad faith. Having read the reported post, I would have appreciated if mgorny had filled out the "Reason" field with a bit more detail, but I'm not currently of the opinion that the report was in bad faith. -Hu] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asturm
Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 8938
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 10:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
User: AlexJGreen
Topic: Report violations, duplicates, misplaced posts, etc.
Post: post 8550539
Reason: Irresponsible post in a report thread.
[Pushback posted. Incidentally, I am curious - did you compose this report manually? We don't normally expose the Report button for posts in the report thread. -Hu]
| Quote: | | I am curious - did you compose this report manually? |
Indeed very much self composed.
Last edited by asturm on Sun Dec 27, 2020 6:18 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AlexJGreen
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Sep 2018
Posts: 149
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 10:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
You're not right. My claim falls under conditions
| Quote: | | Any other post that you think requires moderation |
Please read the rules first and clarify what do you mean when say "Irresponsible", otherwise I consider yo have something personal to me
[You may think the post requires moderation, but by the same token, asturm may think your post requires moderation. I think that your post that asturm reported requested an excessive response for the perceived offense. In my opinion, it is reasonable for asturm to claim you were "irresponsible" based on (1) the excessive remedy requested and (2) that mgorny's report was not obviously in bad faith. -Hu] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ant P.
Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 6920
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AlexJGreen wrote: | | Report without proofs looks like attack. Mods, please ban this man |
What kind of gullible idiot are you trying to impress here? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AlexJGreen
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Sep 2018
Posts: 149
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ant P. wrote: | | AlexJGreen wrote: | | Report without proofs looks like attack. Mods, please ban this man |
What kind of gullible idiot are you trying to impress here? |
I'm not going to make anyone an idiot. I just want to see the original post 
[If you have not seen the original post, then how do you know that mgorny's report was inappropriate? As I wrote above, it could have been more detailed, but the moderation team had the opportunity to read the reported thread before it was placed in quarantine. Since a moderator chose to quarantine the thread and put further work into it, rather than posting pushback in mgorny's report and refusing to change anything, that alone should be evidence that the moderator who handled the report believed that mgorny's report was at least plausible, and therefore not obviously made in bad faith.
As an aside, mgorny is largely inactive on the forums, so a ban would be almost pointless anyway, even if it were completely justified. "Find all posts by this user" shows his most recent post (excluding "Report this user/Report this thread" posts) was from 2018. I only have to go back 4 posts to end up in 2015.
-Hu] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ant P.
Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 6920
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AlexJGreen wrote: | | I'm not going to make anyone an idiot. I just want to see the original post :) |
No, you were quite clearly being provocative in something that's none of your business to elicit a reaction. In another thread you're tacitly threatening to DDoS the server by scraping a forum you claim not to even read with "100-200" bots - that seems like better grounds for a ban. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AlexJGreen
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Sep 2018
Posts: 149
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ant P. wrote: | | AlexJGreen wrote: | | I'm not going to make anyone an idiot. I just want to see the original post |
No, you were quite clearly being provocative in something that's none of your business to elicit a reaction. In another thread you're tacitly threatening to DDoS the server by scraping a forum you claim not to even read with "100-200" bots - that seems like better grounds for a ban. |
If that message makes a problem I expect some one ask to clarify (why I need the data or refuse to provide) or the whole topic moderated. In the message I clearly state that I can (any script kid can), but will not do, and show an example that people have to ask, not to do
Apologies that the message led to the wrong direction. I stop arguing at this point |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6051
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 12:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ant P. wrote: | | AlexJGreen wrote: | | I'm not going to make anyone an idiot. I just want to see the original post |
No, you were quite clearly being provocative in something that's none of your business to elicit a reaction. In another thread you're tacitly threatening to DDoS the server by scraping a forum you claim not to even read with "100-200" bots - that seems like better grounds for a ban. |
That is a total misrepresentation of what was actually stated
| AlexJGreen wrote: | | Well, I can send 100 or 200 crawlers (depending on php limit on the server) to grab the data in parallel, but should I? This will be stressful for servers and result the site unavailable for other people. It is better to ask first. |
A database dump is easier, it would be easier than crawlers and EVEN easier than GDPR requests that would result in each post being isolated for those requesting it wouldn't it?
_________________
| Quote: | | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asturm
Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 8938
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 12:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ant P. wrote: | | AlexJGreen wrote: | | I'm not going to make anyone an idiot. I just want to see the original post |
No, you were quite clearly being provocative in something that's none of your business to elicit a reaction. |
No wonder, considering what weasels have been roaming this thread unsolicitedly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6051
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asturm
Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 8938
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ant P.
Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 6920
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naib wrote: | | A database dump is easier, it would be easier than crawlers and EVEN easier than GDPR requests[…] |
I was unaware the EU planned to annex New Mexico. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6051
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ant P. wrote: | | Naib wrote: | | A database dump is easier, it would be easier than crawlers and EVEN easier than GDPR requests[…] |
I was unaware the EU planned to annex New Mexico. |
That's not how the GDPR works, Gentoo can choose to make its infra not accessible from within the EU to bypass this, but the moment it is accessible and there are EU citizens using it, then catering for the GDPR becomes a legal requirement
_________________
| Quote: | | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6051
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you want to talk about precedent... In 2008 dleveton was given a permanent ban from these forums for arguing in this exact thread when posts from other then Gentoo Devs (now kicked ) were reported when said Gentoo Devs were bringing Gentoo into disrepute. This is a report thread NOT a discussion thread
I'm willing to fall on my own sword if it means you and others are also perminantly banned, you know based upon precidence
_________________
| Quote: | | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asturm
Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 8938
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naib wrote: | | I'm willing to fall on my own sword if it means you and others are also perminantly banned, you know based upon precidence |
I'm sure no one wants you to fall on your own sword. If the newfound double standard here is based on the amount of faux reports of yours then I guess my fate is sealed.
Naib, whatever bone you want to pick in recent times, it is imaginary. In a way though I guess, thanks for your cooperation.
EDIT: This is just to note that I am aware of below random utterance of Old School and choose not to waste the space for any new post on it.
Last edited by asturm on Mon Dec 28, 2020 9:40 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cokey
Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3355
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2020 1:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
The developers at Gentoo who are posting here should be ashamed of themselves. Instead of helping the people who actually matter - the users - on the forums they seem to be intent on ignoring them for their own childish vendetta.
It is no surprise Gentoo has been haemorrhaging users so years if they are treated with such distain by those who are supposedly entrusted to help them
_________________
https://otw20.com/ OTW20 The new place for off the wall chat |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Old School
Apprentice
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 252
Location: West Bank of the Coast Fork
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2020 3:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| asturm wrote: | | Naib wrote: | | I'm willing to fall on my own sword if it means you and others are also perminantly banned, you know based upon precidence |
I'm sure no one wants you to fall on your own sword. If the newfound double standard here is based on the amount of faux reports of yours then I guess my fate is sealed.
Naib, whatever bone you want to pick in recent times, it is imaginary. In a way though I guess, thanks for your cooperation. |
Spoken from the person that would come into OtW being rude and abusive while complaining how the denizens of said sub-forum were rude and abusive!
_________________
www.otw20.com
The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.
George Orwell |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ant P.
Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 6920
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2020 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cokey wrote: | The developers at Gentoo who are posting here should be ashamed of themselves. Instead of helping the people who actually matter - the users - on the forums they seem to be intent on ignoring them for their own childish vendetta.
It is no surprise Gentoo has been haemorrhaging users so years if they are treated with such distain by those who are supposedly entrusted to help them |
Most of OTW aren't even Gentoo users. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flysideways
Guru
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 438
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2020 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ant P. wrote: | | Most of OTW aren't even Gentoo users. |
I am curious how you arrive at that assertion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hu
Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 21724
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I have not looked at the data, but one way to reach that conclusion would be through post count. Historically, a user's post count excluded posts in OTW, so a long-time user, who was routinely seen as active in OTW, who nonetheless has a very low post count according to the forum's builtin tracking, could be assumed to be minimally active in the other forums. This does not mean the person does not run Gentoo on their hardware, but it does mean they make few posts in the technical forums. In one sense, that could be extrapolated to being that the low-post user will not be missed from the technical forums, because they were rarely in the technical forums even when OTW was present and active, so if they quit the site as a result of the OTW changes, the technical forums will barely notice the difference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Gentoo Forums Feedback
