[python-advocacy] Python culture clash complaint

[Tennessee Leeuwenburg]

Hi Jeff,

A very considered response from you...

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 11:41 PM, Jeff Hinrichs - DM&T <jeffh at dundeemt.com>
wrote:

> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 11:00 PM, Tennessee Leeuwenburg
> <tleeuwenburg at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I wouldn't say it was diatribe. I found myself agreeing with many of his
> > comments, and it's a shame that presenting things in a civil manner is
> > thought of as being 'touchy feely'.
> But, I don't consider the passage to be uncivil, I believe it to be
> somewhat funny.


That's just the thing. There's all kinds of people out there.

Since you found yourself agreeing with the blogger, can you point out
> other examples in the docs/faqs that support your view?  Is this a
> broader issue with the docs or not?  You have editorial experience
> that I do not and I trust that you are better at catching these types
> of faux pas, than I.  I contend that at worst, this is an isolated
> passage, whose humor may not be universal.  (A travesty, in my
> opinion<g>)
>
> Irregardless, if you have a patch for the FAQ, I am confident it would
> be accepted.  There is no reason to detract from the fact, that the
> people I have interacted with in the Python community have been the
> helpful, generous and encouraging.


+1 the community is great.

Please pardon a small rant, not directed at you who have been very polite
and level-headed.

Oh, absolutely. By and large, everyone is good and decent, and are basically
just trying to do their best. If they inject a bit of humor to lighten their
day, what harm is done? Usually very little. In my humble opinion, it's just
a little quip in the documentation that my eye would normally simply roll
straight over... In my editorial experience, I have found two things. One:
from time to time, I have come across individuals who are very convinced
that their way of doing things is the Python way of doing things, even when
it isn't, and they can be very forceful about it. By and large I'm a fairly
robust individual, and I don't really mind. Clearly they mean no harm, and
I'm happy to agree to disagree, and I'm happy to roll with their enthusiasm
and not take affront to it. This leads me to point two: that there are a
significant minority of people who can and do take affront to such things.
I've found when I declare in an enthusiastic moment "It is so" that there
are those out there who assume I'm issuing an edict with force. They can
easily be offended or hurt, old wounds can be raked over unkindly, they may
be offended or all kinds of things. That I meant no harm is not the most
important thing going on here -- the harm suffered is the most important
thing going on. I would be tempted to write it off as being their problem
except that as time goes by I can see it's also my problem. I've *seen*
people who have chucked Python away in part because of how they were
treated. I've pissed people off and offended them through curt language or
an offhand response. I've had authors who have been insulted and abused by
reader feedback on their blogs. While I generally think that there's nothing
much wrong with the rough-and-tumble of a robust discussion, I also believe
that's an individual thing and not something that has a home in any official
stance.

I also think it's a shame when those who don't mean any harm can't see that
they're inflicting it. I used to be like that -- probably still am a lot of
the time -- where I could really bother someone and not even notice. It's
just not worth the human cost.

http://xkcd.com/386/

:)

Regards,
-Tennessee
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/advocacy/attachments/20080520/1631b751/attachment-0001.htm>