[liberationtech] Fwd: Presenting the new Lorea distribution: Foxglove

[Anne Roth]

Hi,

Micah, thanks for stepping in. I'd like to take the opportunity to
address the general atmosphere we create here through this mailing list.

It's not the first time it happened to me that I held my breath for a
moment trying to understand whether a reply to an email sent to this
list was just short or actually moving towards being aggressive. They
probably weren't even meant that way but when some of us know each other
and others don't that's sometimes hard to distinguish.

It would be nice if we came back what was once known as netiquette.

I have heard from several people already who haven't posted anything yet
and are very reluctant about it because getting flamed just isn't a very
nice thing to have happen. Especially not in public and more so in a
public made of lots of great and admirable people.

That's a shame for several reasons

- it's rude
- it's not something I'd expect in a place that carries 'liberation' in
its name
- we miss out on things that we might be interested in
- diversity of views and experiences may turn into homogenous
backslapping (and then irrelevance)

I like liberationtech for its many people and backgrounds and its shared
idea of using technology to change the world for something better. It
would be nice if we could keep it that way.

Anne



Am 07.11.12 21:36, schrieb micah anderson:
> Alex Comninos <alex.comninos at gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> On 7 November 2012 19:43, micah anderson <micah at riseup.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Frankly, both of those reactions are embarassing. Are you unaware of the
>>> most important tool that has been used for the most recent Spanish
>>> mobilizations, not to mention many occupy groups around the world and
>>> are letting the entire list know that?
>>>
>>
>> I think the reactions, (though mine was in jest) were honest reflections on
>> the inaccessibility of the discourse explaining the platform, as well as
>> perhaps bad marketing of the platform.
> 
> I honestly think you didn't think before sending your reaction. 
> 
> How can you possibly call 'lolwut' an '...honest reflection on the
> inaccessibility of the discourse explaining the platform'? 
> 
>> Its constructive criticism and I dont think you (or me and NK) should be
>> embarrassed.
> 
> My understanding of constructive criticism doesn't match what you said
> ('lolwut'). Additionally, *constructive* criticism is never done "in
> jest":
> 
>  Constructive criticism is the process of offering valid and
>  well-reasoned opinions about the work of others, usually involving both
>  positive and negative comments, in a friendly manner rather than an
>  oppositional one. In collaborative work, this kind of criticism is often
>  a valuable tool in raising and maintaining performance standards.
> 
> seriously, troll elsewhere...
> micah
> 
> 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_criticism
> --
> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> 


-- 

http://about.me/annalist
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x7689407F942951E2