Aggressive language on python-list

[rurpy at yahoo.com]

On 10/14/2012 03:58 PM, Ben Finney wrote:> Zero Piraeus <schesis at gmail.com> writes:
>[...]
> What's needed, IMO, is a difficult balance: there needs to be calm,
> low-volume, but firm response to instances of hostile behaviour, making
> clear by demonstration – especially to the people only observing the
> discussion – that such hostility is unwanted and not to be tolerated in
> our community.
>[...]

The problem with this is that while there may sometimes be a 
weak consensus, different people have different ideas about
what is "wrong".  Thus when a member of this esteemed group
was recently attacked as racist, for punning another member's
name when responding somewhat heatedly, I, according to your 
view, should have jumped in to point out unfair accusations 
of racism are not only wrong, but hurt the cause of anti-racism 
by devaluing such charges when they are legitimate.

No, what you propose will only reduce the signal to noise ratio
and increase the amount of off-topic arguments.

The old tried-and-true advise is still the best: don't feed the 
trolls.  Experience with three decades of mailing lists and usenet 
has shown that most of them give up and go somewhere else when 
they don't get a response. 

Of course this does not apply when you are the one attacked (or 
perceive you are) -- in that case your advice for a low-key
factual response is quite appropriate.  (And then drop it.)

> To those who feel the need to “fight” the trolls: thank you for caring
> enough about the Python community to try to defend it. But I'm concerned
> that you tend to pour fuel on the flames yourself, and I hope you can
> work to avoid becoming the monster you fight.
> 
>> And, yes, I know bringing it up could be construed as stoking the
>> flames ... but, well, "silence = acquiescence" and all that.
> 
> Agreed. Thanks again.

No.  Silence != acquiescence as a few minutes of thought will
show.  The fact that it is often repeated does not make it 
true.