kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 9/27/2011 8:08 PM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
> On 09/27/2011 03:33 AM, Martijn Kuipers wrote:
>> On Sep 27, 2011, at 12:33 AM, Brian Sidebotham wrote:
>>
>>> On 27 September 2011 00:22, Dick Hollenbeck <dick@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On 09/26/2011 05:04 PM, Fred Cooke wrote:
>>>>> Yes it absolutely is constructive criticism, it points out weaknesses, explains why they
>>>>> are weaknesses, and explains how to do it better. Sounds EXACTLY like constructive
>>>>> criticism to me, Dick. Your name could not be more fitting.
>> I agree the last sentence should not be posted in public space. 
>>
>> I do not agree that it is not constructive criticism, i.e., I think it is constructive. Let's not forget the original poster to whom Dick replied might not be a native English speaker.
>>
>>>> I have de-activated Fred Cooke from this mailing list.
>>>>
>> Judge, Jury and Executioner. This is not very democratic.  
> 
> Wrong metaphor.  Think owner, and major shareholder.  More below.  If you like, "bouncer
> at a shareholder's meeting".
> 
> 
>> In open source (s)he-who-does-the-work-decides is fine with me with respect to general directions, coding decisions, vcs, etc, but this is not a code-problem.
> 
>>> I'm very glad! His posts have only ever been derogatory and of no
>>> substance. Sorry you've had to deal with it.
>> This I also don't agree with. Maybe he has not done as much as you (Brian), Dick or Jean-Pierre, he has been trying to be helpful. 
> 
> 
> Martijn,
> 
> 
> Since you are a shareholder, I will try and respect your opinion, even as I disagree with
> most all of it.
> 
> First, the least controversial:  what is constructive criticism? 
> 
> 1) It does not end with "I do not like it".
> 2) It respects the feelings of the performer.
> 3) It uses language like "if you were to do this ..., then here would be the benefit for
> all of us..."
> 
> 
> I do agree this is more difficult in a foreign language.
> 
> 
> 
> Fred has been trying to gain respect through the wrong means, not through contributions
> and by being respectful.  I grepped through the commit logs and don't see his name once.
> 
> On this list, and in general, *being respectful* earns you good will.  Good will then
> eventually earns you respect. 
> 
> Around here we don't kick the *hens* that lay the golden eggs.  All are not equal here. 
> 
> When decency and respect break down, as has apparently happened here, we would have to
> fall back to understanding of ownership.  Think of this mailing list as a shareholder's
> meeting, one in which they let customer's attend so long as they behave.
> 
> The KiCad project has owners, and users. Some are owners.  Some own more than others. 
> Ownership can be measured by previous contributions.  Contributions come in many forms:
> ideas, team building, leadership, coding, website administration, documenting, sifting
> through bug reports, translating, fixing bugs, building 3-d models, editing wikis, etc.
> etc. etc.
> 
> 
> Here is my most important point:
> those that have succeeded here have all been respectful at the start, this includes
> Jean-Pierre, who has been enormously respectful of the other hens.  Wayne, who has been
> enormously respectful of the other hens.
> 
> Brian, who has been enormously respectful of the hens.  Name after name it's the same
> way.  And I cherish every one of them, too many of which will go unnamed just here.  Sorry
> Jerry, sorry sorry sorry, as I make my point without listing everyone.
> 
> 
> Fabrizio has been enormously respectful of the hens *from the start* and continues to be
> so, and is now a hen himself.
> 
> 
> The respect of the hens is a self identifying personality trait, that predisposes a person
> to succeed here, or to fail if you do not have it.  This does not mean that a person has
> to agree with everything.  I am respecting you now, even as I explain my disagreement.
> 
> 
> When I tried to protect a hen, Fabrizio, I got *personally* attacked in a malicious,
> non-ambiguous, destructive way.  This is not a misunderstanding.   I said that Fred had
> already also attacked me through my facebook account.  Putting this to a vote is
> non-sensical.   Democracy is not even remotely pertinent here.  Even in law, regardless of
> the licensing model used, the project has owners.  It is not a public domain asset.
> 
> 
> I am quite shocked that you would even think that I should have to endure potential future
> personal attacks from this person, after having invested over a quarter million dollars of
> my personal funds into KiCad?  I am also a hen.  I have already earned my good will, and I
> did it by being respectful of the hens and contributing.
> 
> 
> You have no idea whether I contacted the other major shareholders before taking this
> action.  Again, likening this mailing list and this project to a democracy is foolish.  It
> is not a democracy.  You yourself are a shareholder. 
> 
> Everyone can have a say, even non-owners.  By being respectful, things simply work and we
> do not have to focus on ownership.  Amazingly, owners tend to be respectful and listen. 
> (Remember, I am saying they only came to be significant owners because they were
> respectful in the first place.  Interesting phenomenon that.)
> 
> 
> Your opinion is noted.  It seems we disagree.  Fred will not be part of this team so long
> as I am, and I have too much invested to leave at this time.  And trust me when I tell you
> that I did not have to ask the other major shareholders (hens) because I already knew they
> respected me, had already built up that good will, just like I respect them.
> 
> The only awkward part here is that I was the victim.  However, I would not hesitate to do
> the same thing for any other hen should it ever become necessary.
> 
> We clearly do not need to be attacking the hens that lay the golden eggs, as that will
> mean less eggs.
> 
> Dick

If I had a week to work on it, I don't think I could have expressed this any
better.  Maybe we should distill this down into a more general form and add it
to the "Getting Started" FAQ under the heading "Mailing List Etiquette" or my
personal favorite "Nuggets of Wisdom".  Although I'm afraid if you have to
explain to someone that they should respect the efforts of others ( also known
as gratitude ), that adding this to the FAQ would be of little or no benefit.

Wayne