<div dir="ltr">I can respect that. I'll take a week off the list and try to check myself in the future. I'm sorry to everyone on python-ideas. I'm sorry Steven.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 2:38 PM, Brett Cannon <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:brett@python.org" target="_blank">brett@python.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="m_4003173083760218051inbox-inbox-b5 m_4003173083760218051inbox-inbox-xJNT8d"><div class="m_4003173083760218051inbox-inbox-uyb8Gf"><div><div class="m_4003173083760218051inbox-inbox-F3hlO"><div dir="ltr"><div>I'm starting a new thread on this to make sure it receives appropriate visibility for everyone on this list. <b>There are ramifications for those involved in this whole situation</b> as outlined at the end of this email.<br></div><div><br></div><div>To review, this mailing list operates under the PSF Community Code of Conduct: <a href="https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/" target="_blank">https://www.python.org/psf/<wbr>codeofconduct/</a>
. That means everyone is expected to be open, considerate, and
respectful. Titus and I have operated this list such that people who
don't follow the CoC get a warning, then a temporary ban of a month or
two, then a year-long ban, then a permanent ban (and we reserve the
right to skip any of these steps as we see fit based on how bad the
infraction was). Since the traffic here can get a bit heavy and thus we
don't read every email, we rely on people reporting things as
appropriate to python-ideas-owner@ if things have gotten out of hand.<br></div><div><br></div><div>And
boy did things get out of hand on the "Syntactic sugar to declare
partial functions" thread. Here is what I saw play out (bolding is
mine):</div><div><br></div><div>----------</div><div>[Abe]<br>Words like 'partial', 'curry', 'lambda', and 'closure' are fine for text books, published papers, and technical discussion, <b>but I think they would (or do in the case of 'lambda') harm Python</b>.<br><br>[Steven]<br><b>That's an extreme overreaction</b>.<br><br>Do you mean to imply that there are people who looked at Python, loved<br>the language, but decided to use something else because they didn't like<br>the choice of the keyword "lambda"?<br><br>If not, in what way is Python harmed? Would it be faster if the keyword<br>was "function", or use less memory, or more expressive?<br><br>Remember that to millions of programmers in the world, "function" is<br>just as much an obscure foreign piece of jargon they have to memorise as<br>"lambda" is to English-speakers.<br><br>[Abe]<br>Extreme? I thought it was a rather benign opinion.<b> I'm not exactly frothing at the mouth here. It's not like I'm declaring holy war on Python for using the word 'lambda'.</b> I just think it was a mistake (and thatdeath should come to all non-believers).<br><br>[Steve]<br><br>You've said that the choice of keyword, "lambda", has caused harm. Given<br>the chance to clarify what you meant, <b>you stood by your comment that the<br>choice of keyword "lambda" has done real, significant, non-trivial harm</b><br>to Python (the language, or the community). Presumably you fear the same<br>thing will happen again if we choose "partial" (otherwise, why raise the<br>issue?).<br><br>[Abe]<br>Notice:<b> I never said "real, significant, non-trivial harm" anywhere</b> in this entire discussion. I never said anything close to that. <b>Stop jamming bullshit in my mouth</b> to suit your narrative that I'm "extremely overreacting". It's not cute.</div><div>----------<br></div><div><br></div><div>The
way I read this going down is Abe thought something "would harm
Python". "Harm" is a strong word to use, so Steven called it an "extreme
overreaction". Now stating it like a fact is unnecessary, abrasive, and
a bit of hyperbole. Abe thought we he thought and that's fine, but it
isn't universally considered an overreaction; it was an opinion and Abe
correctly stated it as such. Steven could have easily left out the
hyperbole and framing like a statement of fact and still made the same
point.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Abe then reacted with more hyperbole
as he disagreed with Steven's statement that he was overreacting. So
now we are reacting to hyperbole with hyperbole.</div><div><br></div><div>Steven
then reacted by overstating the strength of Abe's initial intentions.
That's a misunderstanding at best, entirely misleading at worst.</div><div><br></div><div>At that point Abe crossed a line and basically yelled at Steven to "stop jamming bullshit in [his] mouth".</div><div><br></div><div>So
how should have this been handled? First, dropping all hyperbole, not
stating opinions as facts, and not being so abrasive would have probably
stopped all of this from happening. Had Steven just said "I think
that's an overreaction; can you please clarify what harm you think
happened?" then he would have gotten the answer he wanted and Abe would
not have taken offense. Abe replying with his own hyperbole didn't help.</div><div><br></div><div>Steven
also didn't need to misrepresent what Abe said. Choosing to
re-interpret what level of harm Abe meant was not appropriate (unless
Steven got a bit sloppy and replied from memory instead of going back
and reading the emails he was replying to).<br></div><div><br></div><div>And
finally, Abe's response was totally uncalled for. I don't care how out
of line someone on this list is, you don't react like that. You come to
Titus and me and we will handle it. If you need to, step back for an
hour or day before replying if that's what it takes to not react in a
rude manner.<br></div><div><br></div><div>I shouldn't be having to
explain to adults on how to communicate among strangers of different
cultures, but here we are. I did an entire PyCon US keynote on why we
need to treat open source as a series of kindnesses and react as such: <a href="https://youtu.be/tzFWz5fiVKU?t=49m29s" target="_blank">https://youtu.be/tzFWz5fiVKU?<wbr>t=49m29s</a>
. If we don't treat everything as a kindness then open source simply
doesn't work and people end up walking way from open source and the
Python community.<br></div><div><br></div><div>So,<b> ramifications from all of this</b> ...<br></div><div><br></div><div>Steven,
stop stating your opinion as fact and being needlessly abrasive. Your
abrasiveness in responses has pushed multiple threads to breaking points
like this before and I know you have the skills to not do that if you
chose to because I've seen it here and on other mailing lists.
Constructive conversations never need anything abrasive in them in order
to get your intentions across. Consider this a warning to scale back
the tone in response to be more respectful.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Abe, you're receiving a warning about how you eventually reacted. In the
future please just step away from the keyboard until you can react
appropriately. The way you responded to Steven is not acceptable as it
isn't respectful to others on this list and there shouldn't be
"vigilante responses"; if you feel someone has violated the CoC then
tell us admins and we will handle it.</div><div><br></div><div>-Brett & Titus<br></div></div>
</div></div></div></div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>