Friday, September 16, 2016

Re: IRC SIG needs external oversight

On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:13:13 -0400
Striker Leggette <> wrote:

> On 09/16/2016 12:05 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Well, yes, but (aside from the Orig poster) everyone else is basing
> > their information on things that happened many years ago.
> It's still happening, just FYI:
> [Thursday, September 15, 2016] [11:16:26 AM EDT]
> <Southern_Gentlem> Groan, as always your lack of being responsible
> comes back to you eventually you can keep this on that you lock
> yourself out of the box [Thursday, September 15, 2016] [11:17:00 AM
> EDT] <Southern_Gentlem> we cant fix stupid

IMHO that is taken out of context.

He was talking to a user who had some particular/interesting security
cases that didn't make much sense. They were talking about a
hypothetical user in one of those cases, not the person he was talking
to. At least thats the way I read it... but I guess I will stop trying
to defend anyone and let them do it themselves.

> I think we need to realize that this happens all the time and not
> just 3+ years ago or during isolated incidents like the one that
> prompted this thread. While OPs themselves might simply find these
> types of statements to simply be informative or to "point the user in
> the right direction", collectively, the statements are abrasive.
> Not having any Fedora IRC SIG tickets open for negative feedback does
> not mean that the negative treatment is not happening.

Sure, but I disagree that it's as bad as people make out...

Anyhow, the council is of course free to redo anything they like.

I do hope they will make sure they have sufficient people available if
they decide to take over / replace the existing group.


No comments:

Post a Comment