Comments on: gnome is humans; jeff is human; murray is violating the no asshole rule

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:10:48 +0000

Benjamin, when the “job” you take responsibility of is to accept or reject people for inclusion on the planet, you have to… *shock* accept or include them. Replying, no matter what the outcome, is part of the damn job. If you can’t do it in a timely manner, you should be fired for being a public relations destroyer.

By: Rudd-O

Rudd-O — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 16:10:39 +0000

I think civility is OVERRATED. But I also think Murray should have quoted from relevant places when he ranted. By doing so, he would have proved his point beyond any shadow of doubt, nipped this controversy in the bud. GNOMErs tend to respond to well-reasoned arguments much better than to explosions of character.

If GNOME is people, then everyone in GNOME needs to be prepared for these kinds of happenings every once in a while. It’s human to blurt stuff out, and it’s not necessarily unhealthy. If Murray feels like lashing out to anyone, it’s his biology-given right and people should have accepted it from the outset (the question of respecting his opinion, of course, is something that’s open to pondering).

By: Valek Filippov

Valek Filippov — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 23:17:03 +0000

Seems like they didn’t think it was a problem before.

Yes, they did.
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2007-September/msg00004.html

By: People Over Process » links for 2007-11-30

People Over Process » links for 2007-11-30 — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 07:18:01 +0000

[...] gnome is humans; jeff is human; murray is violating the no asshole rule On a strictly meta note: someone outta write a book one day of “when the community attacks” for open source projects. (tags: via:sogrady gnome opensource scandal) [...]

By: Benjamin Otte

Benjamin Otte — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 19:43:43 +0000

Funny, how all these people come out of the woodwork to complain about Jeff, now that Murray started. Seems like they didn’t think it was a problem before. Or were they afraid of speaking up?

Really, I don’t think not adding someone to Planet Gnome is proof of anything about Jeff. I bet there’s at least 50 people that I didn’t answer an email for whatever reasons, even though they would have liked me to.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 18:01:37 +0000

http://kiddo.ecchi.ca/blog/?p=260 Take a look at this blog from one of my buddies. Jeff Waugh almost turned him off to development in gnome in general.

Murray, as much of an assinine post as he wrote, was correct.

By: Hello Planet GNOME | TuxFeed

Hello Planet GNOME | TuxFeed — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 18:00:31 +0000

[...] link a pollycoke era contenuto in un post di Luis Villa ed era ovviamente relativo al mio “La Situazione del Mio desktop non è BUONA” in cui (per chi [...]

By: links for 2007-11-29 [on Simon Phipps, SunMink]

links for 2007-11-29 [on Simon Phipps, SunMink] — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 10:00:47 +0000

[...] Luis Villa on Gnome Elections Luis hits the nail on the head, as usual. Classic case of negative campaigning hurting more than it helps. (tags: Gnome) [...]

By: tecosystems » links for 2007-11-29

tecosystems » links for 2007-11-29 — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:22:00 +0000

[...] Luis Villa’s Blog / gnome is humans; jeff is human; murray is violating the no asshole rule good to see Luis outline his position on the GNOME flap in more depth, and condemn the approach taken by Murray. disagreement and criticism are fine things, as Luis says, and no one is perfect. but there is no excuse whatsoever for what was said. (tags: luisvilla jeffwaugh gnome) [...]

By: bi

bi — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:02:01 +0000

Luis:

In what way was Murray’s post a personal attack? In what way was Murray a troll? The terms don’t mean what you think they mean.

“Michael Moore is fat” is a personal attack. “Michael Moore is a communist” is a personal attack. “Michael Moore does a piss-poor job at whatever he’s claims he’s good at” is not. It may be vehement, it may be emotional, it may be unsubstantiated, but it is not a personal attack.

And if — as you admit yourself — that Murray’s blog post is actually bringing some useful, fruitful information to the table, then in what sense was Murray being a “troll”? A troll is by definition someone who courts useless attention just for the sake of courting useless attention.

When you label Murray as a “troll”, and Murray’s comments as “personal attacks”, I think you are the one who’s guilty of personal attacks here.