On 9/2/19 4:33 PM, Keith Moore wrote: > On 9/2/19 8:19 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> An observation: you seem to be very focused on a specific kind of >> abuse. Is it really abusive to have the way you communicate challenged? > It can be. If it's used as a way to distract from technical > contributions, absolutely it is. If the accusation is based on nothing > more than the complainer's prejudice or imagination about what the > speaker's intent was or what the speaker might have been thinking, > absolutely it is. It seems to me that if the goal is to have free and constructive discussion, it's important to acknowledge that some language/"tone" can militate against that happening, and create a hostile environment in which some participants may (and, as we know from experience, do) choose not to speak, choose not to continue to participate, and so on. But I'm trying to understand the broader context here, as well. What we're asking for is no more stringent than what's expected in the typical workplace, conferences, other technical bodies, and so on. In many cases, it's less. Do you feel that the typical workplace, conferences like RailsConf, and technical communities like Mozilla's are unsafe for honest technical discussion? Melinda -- Melinda Shore melinda.shore@xxxxxxxxx Software longa, hardware brevis
