[Smaug] Re: [SlugLUG] Ok, let's put it to a vote

Karsten Wade phig at phig.org
Mon, 22 Apr 2002 15:26:44 -0700 (PDT)


SlugLUGers : my apologies for taking your time on this subject, please
feel free to hit 'd' or whatever your MUA calls for.

On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, David Correa wrote:

> I felt I could have helped a lot there, unfortunately, the "directors" did
> not showed to me a lot of backbone when the gpg key signing and web site
> maintenance arguments there were happening. It sure looked to me that
> they would rather have RM making the last call on all. Something that
> I question since he does not live here, or have showed that is willing to
> come here _regularly_. I also received an very insulting email
> from the SMAUG founder, therefore I left.

As the sf.net SMAUG project leader who actually did put David on the
project admins list, I have some insite here.  I had been leaving this one
alone, but the topic seems to keep coming up.  David, you say that you
have no emotional attachment to the situation, but I think that your
feelings might be otherwise.  The end-game on that particular situation
happened as it did partially because I was trying to spare your feelings
and give you room to do what you felt was necessary.  

In general, I did not agree with the arguments that you made regarding the
GPG keysigning protocol.  There was no situation of my bowing under tp the
authority of Rick Moen in this or any other matter.  I believe that the
public archives speak for themselves.  In terms of the way the flamewar
went, I did not take place in the beratement that occured.  However, I
think that generally one needs to be able to take some heat when posting
on the Internet, and only have sympathy for newbies who don't know any
better. David, I don't consider you to be a newbie, so I did not rush to
your defense against Rick. 

I am replying to this on-list, which I am normally loath to do, because
the topic keeps coming up on this list and on the Smaug list.  Since I am
uniquely qualified, I am hoping to gently put it to rest.

Below is an exact timeline of the events.  This timeline is backed up by
the online, public archives of the Smaug mailing list at
http://lists.svlug.org/lists/listinfo/smaug and the non-public
server logs of events at http://sf.net/projects/smaug-web.  As for the
sf.net logs, I trust that we won't have to subpeona them to settle this
issue. ;)

1. In a Smaug meeting, David volunteered to sit on the Website management
committee (http://lists.svlug.org/archives/smaug/2002q1/000317.html).

2. As a follow-up to that, David asked that he be added as a project admin
at http://sf.net/projects/smaug-web
(http://lists.svlug.org/archives/smaug/2002q1/000324.html). Since I was
recently made a project admin for that project, I smacked my head for not
thinking of this and diligently gave David's uid every permission that my
uid had (http://lists.svlug.org/archives/smaug/2002q1/000329.html).

3. Meanwhile, I started a thread asking if we wanted to have a GPG
keysigning party at an upcoming Smaug meeting
(http://lists.svlug.org/archives/smaug/2002q1/000320.html)

4. A semi-ridiculous flamewar started which involved some of the
players you may recognize.  You can start at the link above and "Next
message" your way through, it is a pretty quick read.  Draw your own
conclusions, as I did mine.

5. While this was occuring, David was trying to update the Smaug
Website hosted on sf.net.  He ran into permission problems and he and I
attempted to troubleshoot the issue.  Despite my best attempts, I was not
able to make his account work properly.  This troubleshooting was all done
between us directly in private email.  I put out a general appeal to the
list asking for help from someone to get his account working
(http://lists.svlug.org/archives/smaug/2002q1/000338.html).

6. While we were trying to resolve this issue, the flamewar continued to
the point where David decided that he no longer wanted to be involved with
the group (http://lists.svlug.org/archives/smaug/2002q1/000363.html).

7. There were some private discussions between the list admins and David,
which were generally positive.  However, I believe that is where one of
the group founders who is not an active member wrote some remarks to David
that were non-positive which he referred to in his above paragraph.  At
the end of that, David stayed the course he had set and decided to
sign-off the list.

8. Respecting his decision, I did what I thought then and think now was
a perfectly reasonable thing to do, and that was to remove his project
admin status at the http://sf.net/projects/smaug-web pages.  While this is
not a "mission critical" Webpage, it still seemed prudent to remove
control from someone who was upset at recent events and who had
_quit_the_group_.

Please let none of this convice you of my opinion on the actions of
anyone.  My opinions are carefully left out of this discussion, as they
are mine.  The only opinion I have is that I think everyone should always
be nicer to each other.

I think we all have something good to contribute, and if you don't like
the way that someone is writing to you or treating you, you are better off
sidestepping the spear tip they are offering you.  If you choose not to,
you are engaging in the combat and are now as much to blame as the other
person.  Often times, offense is detected where none lies.  However, once
you respond as if offended, then you have actively participated in
engaging in the combat.  In war, there are no innocents.

In most cases, it is impossible to tell who threw the first blow, just as
it is hard to tell who threw the last.

'Nuff said.  Thanks for your time and interest.  I will gladly answer any
questions anyone has in this public forum, unless you wish to keep our
conversations private, which I will fully respect.

- k'

'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`
 Karsten  Wade           "As sharp as the leading
 karsten@phig.org        edge of a ball bearing."
 http://phig.org/gpg/              - Dallas Dobro