Timeline for Can we turn down the campaign heat, please?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 21, 2014 at 20:07 | comment | added | Rob Moir | ... At the moment, I think the problem is that SE have sold this plot as a timeshare to two different groups without telling either group about the other. It was sold to us "olde tyme sysadmins" as a home for professional sysadmin types to ask and answer professional sysadmin questions. It appears lately that its also been sold to everyone else as a home for whatever vaguely "oh that sounds system-y to me" questions, thoughts or vague intestinal discomfort that drives them to type on a keyboard that they may have. Regardless of which 'side' is right or wrong, that ain't going to end well. | |
| Nov 21, 2014 at 20:05 | comment | added | Rob Moir | I think @Shog9 and the other stack exchange staff need to take a look at themselves and the empathy they have towards the community here already - as a group I mean, I don't doubt the individual sincerity of shog, for example. Why do I say that? Well if one person has a problem with a site then maybe that one person is the problem. If lots of people have a problem with a site (and there are problems from either 'end', lets be honest here) then maybe the site has a problem... | |
| Nov 21, 2014 at 9:41 | comment | added | Mark Henderson Mod | I think you're reading too much into what Shog and I are saying. I mean nothing more than what I said: sometimes this place can be poisonous. Sometimes. Not all the time. Not always. Not to everyone. And nobody has given up. If I had given up, I wouldn't be here, and I wouldn't be voicing my concerns. There are those that have given up and left. And there are people in this community that need to have more empathy for their fellows. That's all I'm saying and I think that's all Shog was saying. There's nothing wrong with introspection. | |
| Nov 21, 2014 at 9:32 | comment | added | Andrew B | Nothing wrong with asking Hopeless why he thinks making our image worse is a useful solution. Everything wrong with two mods publicly agreeing that SF is bad and should feel bad; give up on the troops and they give up on you. | |
| Nov 21, 2014 at 9:02 | comment | added | Mark Henderson Mod | Shog felt the need to call out Hopeless on what he felt was a problem in his nomination spiel. Again, I don't see what the problem with asking people the hard questions is. Additionally, I happen to agree with Shog's sentiments. The existing community here can be poisonous at times. And some people are just too blind to see that, and need to have it shoved in their faces. I can't comment on specific cases, but there are moderator nominees (plural) that have had serious moderator actions against them in the past. These people had better make a damn good case why we should vote for them. | |
| Nov 21, 2014 at 8:44 | comment | added | Andrew B | No one's saying you can't. If you don't see why some might find a contradiction in that presentation, eh. I'll give it to you that yours was the lesser of the two by far. If you don't see a problem with shog's remark though, I just don't know man. I know why we have that reputation, I know we have a vocal minority who do fit the label, but how is it helpful to advocate for less radical approaches while sh*t talking the entire community? Is this supposed to inspire the rest of us to rise up somehow? News flash guys: we're the ones with the shakier morale. | |
| Nov 21, 2014 at 8:22 | history | answered | Mark HendersonMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |