Review Request: Change "abort session" to "exit session" in kdm

[Sebastian Kügler]

Hey Ossi,

On Sunday 19 July 2009 13:54:42 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 02:52:06AM +0200, Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > On Wednesday 15 July 2009 22:49:46 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > > i don't have the impression that you fully appreciate the effects of
> > > the function whose naming you are trying to change. let me propose a
> > > few alternatives: shoot down, blow away, nuke. or maybe you prefer
> > > references to forceful termination of life? how about kill, slay,
> > > snuff? or maybe let's just stay with abort, how would that be?
> >
> > Instead of trying to be sarcastic, and failing at that,
>
> i really wonder why it failed. somebody care to give me lessons in
> sarcasm? ;)

Sarcasm is highly dependant on cultural, social, educational background, age, 
understanding of the matter in question. As such, sarcasm will fail in most 
cases in a community as diverse as KDE. Better not use it, especially not when 
talking to people you don't know. It's almost sure you'll be misunderstood.

So your line:

"the rest gets a clear reject. think about it. ;-)"

Just wasn't clear enough, and given its brevity, that's no surprise to me. To 
prevent this misunderstanding, making your point clear (not by being rude or 
sarcastic, but  by providing examples, suggestions for improvements or an 
explanation *why* you think something's a bad idea) would have prevented that.

On Sunday 19 July 2009 13:54:42 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > giving some more background information about a particular patch
> > proposed by Mackenzie,
>
> i find that insulting. by doing so she implied that i didn't get what
> it is all about. never mind that the differenciated reply to maco's
> patch proved otherwise already.

You being insulted explains your reply, partly. It's not based on insult, but 
on misunderstanding however. See above explanation.

> of course it would be rather paranoid to assume ill-meaning, but i also
> fail to come up with an interpretation which would be actually to her
> advantage. 

So essentially you're saying that Mackenzie wanted to do bad to KDE? I 
seriously doubt that.

> in such cases i become annoyed and reserve the right to be
> sarcastic. like it or not - i'm not going to change.

It isn't about rights, it's how we all deal with each other. Since I *know* 
you have difficulties imagining how your words will be read by other people 
(empathy), I'm trying to help you here. And I'm also trying to make sure that 
newcomers like Mackenzie are not totally scared off at first contact. It's not 
something I enjoy doing, but I find it very important. It's me trying to 
prevent you from (inadvertently) doing harm to the community.

I think the general idea is to ask, not to assume bad. In doubt, just ask 
someone on IRC, that'll usually make it clearer. (It's what I do when in 
doubt.)

> On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 02:25:15AM +0100, David Jarvie wrote:
> > something which needs to be considered before globally changing
> > "abort" to "cancel" etc - is that abort sometimes really means abort,
>
> thanks for spelling it out that explicitly. i wouldn't have thought that
> it is necessary.

And this is the exact point. There are many different people with different 
backgrounds on k-c-d (and in KDE in general). What might be accepted behaviour 
or considered funny among your (IRL) peers (those that share your cultural, 
educational and social background, those that know you) will leave many others 
puzzled. In fact, sarcasm is a pretty good way to ensure that people who are 
not "exactly like you" are not able to access the community and contribute to 
KDE. To be clear, not even *I* understood the reason for you rejecting those 
hunks.

Another general rule: Write out what exactly the issue is. You won't educate 
people by being vague and (perceived) unfriendly and by making people unsure, 
unsure if their contribution is welcome at all, but also unsure about what you 
actually mean with your emails. (And if those emails contain strong words such 
as "shoot down, blow away, nuke [...] kill, slay, snuff", that makes you a 
scary person.)
You can safely assume that most people that actually send patches are smart 
and willing so they'd even learn if you explained the issue in a friendly way. 
Don't assume people can read your mind, *do* assume that explaining issue you 
have with a certain patch will be read, considered and thought about if 
written down. Do assume that being friendly creates an environment that makes 
it much easier to learn and understand -- which is what you're trying to 
achieve.

Hope that helps, even if your "please educate me" wasn't actually meant that 
way.

Cheers,
-- 
sebas

http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org | GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 489 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20090720/49d019b5/attachment.sig>