Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
"be consistent"

Re^5: Amicable divorce (The Camel Paradox)

by chromatic (Archbishop)
on Jul 06, 2020 at 16:49 UTC ( #11118976=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^4: Amicable divorce (The Camel Paradox)
in thread Amicable divorce

The current promise to gentrify your oneliners at all costs...

... is a very dishonest reading of that message, one which ignores the rest of the thread which pushes back against it.

Which is it? Is it already happening at dizzying speed, or is this just a discussion where one person has an idea and other people disagree?

  • Comment on Re^5: Amicable divorce (The Camel Paradox)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Amicable divorce (The Camel Paradox)
by ribasushi (Pilgrim) on Jul 12, 2020 at 01:43 UTC
    > ... the rest of the thread which pushes back against it ... just a discussion where one person has an idea and other people disagree?
    chromatic, you are lying and misdirecting. Please stop.
      It's really bothering me that key players of the community are resorting to more and more vitriol in the discussion. (including <update: names deleted> to name a few)

      Why isn't it possible to create a process where

      • interest groups are identified
      • a common strategy is outlined
      • RFCs are formulated with a test suite
      • a quality management looks over proof of concept and the implementation

      I always thought that my lack of understanding of P5P discussions is due to my limited knowledge.

      But I'm certain now that there is a serious and frustrating communication problem which needs to be resolved politically.

      And "politically" means a discussion and decision process which is transparent, reliable and efficient.

      Probably with mediators channeling the diplomacy and questioning the terminology.


      I'm totally pro dispute just in a scientific way, i.e sober and non emotional.

      Cheers Rolf
      (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
      Wikisyntax for the Monastery

        Here's your discussion:

        You can still help since the group "Would benefit from volunteer developers (who are subscribed to the vision)", as long as you don't forget to "actively support the leadership".


        Please note that Liz and Wendy are *not* part of this discussion in any way whatsoever. I did reply the other day to a post by chromatic, indicating that *parsing* in Raku is slow, rather then the whole of Raku. That's it. Please go figure out your shit by yourselves. The elephant in the room "responsible" for all the chaos, has left the room. Liz
          A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://11118976]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others surveying the Monastery: (6)
As of 2020-09-29 12:11 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    If at first I donít succeed, I Ö

    Results (146 votes). Check out past polls.