Tone and community guidelines

344 views
Skip to first unread message

Alex Skinner

unread,
Feb 20, 2015, 12:30:06 PM2/20/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
Hi,

I want to support a vibrant community for the Lucee list but at times the tone and interactions on here are really not acceptable. Usually, this is a handful of people being louder than most.

The Association and its members should not be fielding complaints regarding this list or spending effort in that regard.

I want this list to be approachable to all contributors, new and old, and that people of all levels be that:

1. English as a first language
2. Experience of CFML and programming in general
3. Confidence in writing or self-confidence possibly. 

That everyone is comfortable contributing and are not going to get shot down.

Like all communities we decide the environment we create.

I for one see no benefit in the time associated with creating a code of conduct like we see at certain conferences, we are all adults and know how to behave.

I also don't think this should be a moderated list but can I ask that if threads turn into an off topic discussion involving just a few individuals that you take the discussion elsewhere.

If people leave the list or put the list on digest because they want to filter some of this stuff then to me it's not just them that loses out.

In general terms, I feel really positive about Lucee, the progress and how the community has rallied around it.

Cheers

Alex

--
Alex Skinner
Managing Director

Pixl8 Interactive, 3 Tun Yard, Peardon Street, London
SW8 3HT, United Kingdom



T: +44 [0] 845 260 0726 W: www.pixl8.co.uk E: in...@pixl8.co.uk




Follow us on: Facebook Twitter LinkedIn



CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED - This e-mail and any attachment is intended solely for the addressee, is strictly confidential and may also be subject to legal, professional or other privilege or may be protected by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you are not the addressee please do not read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on it or any attachments. Instead, please email it back to the sender and then immediately permanently delete it. Pixl8 Interactive Ltd Registered in England. Registered number: 04336501. Registered office: 8 Spur Road, Cosham, Portsmouth, Hampshire, PO6 3EB

Igal @ Lucee.org

unread,
Feb 20, 2015, 12:46:29 PM2/20/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
+2

I would add to your list:

4. No profanity or cuss/curse/swear words.  This is a professional forum and users should behave accordingly.


Igal Sapir

Lucee Core Developer
Lucee.org

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAFrbJ5WZ_XhtSqw3BaY-0%3DAJg0ZgJSDGU8zwJcXvVCrGAd%3DLSw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Michael Offner

unread,
Feb 20, 2015, 2:50:00 PM2/20/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
+1
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/54E772E7.6000204%40lucee.org.

Bilal

unread,
Feb 21, 2015, 9:43:49 AM2/21/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
Agreed.

Ron Stewart

unread,
Feb 21, 2015, 9:47:02 AM2/21/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
Alex,

A few comments and questions, offered constructively:

a. If there are to be guidelines, they will need to be captured and presented somewhere in order for community members or potential community members to know that such guidelines exist. I don't think it is safe to assume that everyone will simply "know how to behave". Summarizing them at the top of the welcome page for the group, for instance, would seem to me to be one logical place for that.

b. Recognize that there are going to be varying scales for many of us where what some participants might feel to be off-topic, offensive, or profane is not considered so by others.

c. "English as a first language"... does this refer to the communication here or to the participants? I think I know the intent, but the way it is phrased in your post leaves it open to interpretation. If we are establish guidelines, we'll want them to be as clear and unambiguous as we can.

d. Would you elaborate on your #3? I'm not sure what you are pointing toward.

e. RE your comment about the effort of developing a code of conduct: that's effectively what you are proposing here, at some level. I see two benefits to that effort. First, it shows people we care enough to take seriously making sure people understand the expectations regarding how people conduct themselves within the community. Second, it provides a clear set of expectations of behavior and how behavior deemed unacceptable will be addressed. I see value in value in both. 

f. If there are guidelines and if they are to be real, the list moderators (or "shepherds", perhaps, as I don't see them moderating content under most situations) will need to be responsible for timely intervention and providing guidance to participants (out of band, in some cases) as content and community members drift toward or step over those guidelines. That can be a challenging and sometimes unpleasant responsibility. Who would those moderators be and are they willing to take that on?

Rick Mason

unread,
Feb 21, 2015, 4:30:38 PM2/21/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I belong to a group called API Craft and they have a simple credo: think twice and email once.  I think that is pretty good advice.


Rick


Adam Cameron

unread,
Feb 21, 2015, 5:27:32 PM2/21/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
On 22 February 2015 at 10:30, Rick Mason <rhm...@gmail.com> wrote:
I belong to a group called API Craft and they have a simple credo: think twice and email once.  I think that is pretty good advice.

Yeah, but you'll still get ppl like me who word what I say and how I say it very precisely (well: most of the time ;-), however this still violates a lot of people's social mores which seem to revolve around hand-wringing and worrying about whether "everything is awesome!" more than a need to cut to the chase sometimes and just get on with it.

That said, whether I like that or not, I'm aware it's reality. If there's a scale of black to white, I realise I am an outlier in one direction or the other, and we all feel more awesome the closer we are to being within a single standard deviation of distinctly average.

Accordingly I have taken Alex's suggestions on board.

-- 
Adam

Adam Cameron

unread,
Feb 21, 2015, 8:52:54 PM2/21/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com


On Sunday, 22 February 2015 03:47:02 UTC+13, Ron Stewart wrote:
Alex,

A few comments and questions, offered constructively:

a. If there are to be guidelines, they will need to be captured and presented somewhere in order for community members or potential community members to know that such guidelines exist. I don't think it is safe to assume that everyone will simply "know how to behave". Summarizing them at the top of the welcome page for the group, for instance, would seem to me to be one logical place for that.

Agreed.
 
e. RE your comment about the effort of developing a code of conduct: that's effectively what you are proposing here, at some level.

Well: quite.

I reckon the wording - which needs a proof read & some spit and shine as you allude to, Ron - should be posted as a "sticky" at the top of the topic list. The intent and the general gist of it is good.

We could perhaps also benefit from having another one with a technical angle: how to ask questions sensibly, etc (eg: http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html).

-- 
Adam

Adam Cameron

unread,
Feb 21, 2015, 9:13:21 PM2/21/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com


On Saturday, 21 February 2015 06:46:29 UTC+13, Igal wrote:
+2

I would add to your list:

4. No profanity or cuss/curse/swear words.  This is a professional forum and users should behave accordingly.


That's getting a bit nanny-state, I think? It also presupposes there's some sort of inverse correlation between profanity and professionalism.

I would say it's perhaps unacceptable to make ad hominem attacks on people (and we're both guilty as charged there, eh, Igal? ;-), but - seriously - ppl who pretend to blush at words they perceive to be naughty perhaps ought to learn to deal with that themselves. This also is part of living in a grown-up professional world. Their position is not automatically correct. Nor just because they have a position on something does it mean that everyone else automatically has to take that position too. This is something ppl don't seem to "get" sometimes.

It's the invective intent people sometimes reflect by using "bad language" that is the issue. Not the words themselves. The words themselves are often very effective modifiers in a fairly flat communications medium. As long as they're not used mean-spiritedly, what's the actual problem?

On the other hand, there's quite a lot of passive-aggressive loosely ad hominem subtext going on in forums too (indeed, in this very thread to a trivial degree). However people make sure to express that without an overtly inflammatory tone so as to be able to crawl away going "what? Me? No, that's not what I meant" when clearly it bloody was what they meant. This is also poor form, anti-social, not to mention quite dishonest and disingenuous and actually should be considered something to censure. That's a bit trickier than going "no swear words" though, innit?

NB: my comment here is more based on being fascinated by the forum dynamic on this sort of topic (not this forum in particular, just the whole social dynamic). I don't personally perceive there's a case to answer to on anyone's part at all, however I think having house rules are a good idea to make people feel better about things. I also completely think you're entitled to your opinion, Igal. As we must be getting used to by now... I just don't happen to agree with it ;-)

-- 
Adam

Steven Durette

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 12:13:11 AM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
**** snip
It's the invective intent people sometimes reflect by using "bad language" that is the issue. Not the words themselves. The words themselves are often very effective modifiers in a fairly flat communications medium. As long as they're not used mean-spiritedly, what's the actual problem?
**** end snip
The actual problem is that you are making assumptions about the audience. The current push in the United States is to get kids programming and therefore you can expect some young ones to possibly join the lists if they start programming in Lucee. In some places it is actually illegal to speak profanities in front of children. 
Oh and many businesses consider profanity to be in-professional. 
One last thought that my great grandmother taught me was that profanity is only used by a mind too weak to logically defend a position. 

Sent from my iPhone
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.

Adam Cameron

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 12:28:33 AM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com


On Sunday, 22 February 2015 18:13:11 UTC+13, Steven Durette wrote:
In some places it is actually illegal to speak profanities in front of children. 

Interesting! I would love to see some reference to that to see how it possibly came about. Nothing surprises me about what they'll legislate about in the States though.

 
One last thought that my great grandmother taught me was that profanity is only used by a mind too weak to logically defend a position.

Oh yeah. A lot of ppl trot-out that nonsense. Generally ppl who can't make a case with logic and facts, ironically. And is itself - obviously - an ad hominem attack (although such a limp one, I don't think it really matters. The only real risk is spraining one's eyeballs from rolling them too much ;-).

I suspect the "off topic" klaxon is warming up though, so perhaps we'd better move on from this. Serious - on topic! - question... is it OK to have off topic conversations (because I think this is interesting) with other community members here if they're marked as off-topic?

-- 
Adam

Kai Koenig

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 1:35:49 AM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I’m tempted to say that if one can’t deal with someone using “profanities” like for instance “for fuck’s sake” in an appropriate general context, those people could just read over the respective expression and move on.

I do agree with Adam, nanny-state is exactly the right expression for the suggested rule:

"4. No profanity or cuss/curse/swear words.  This is a professional forum and users should behave accordingly.”

I do understand that some people might be offended by using expressions like the above in their culture. That’s fair enough. However, please realise that it’s perfectly fine and accepted in various other cultures to use — for instance — the above, or a more general “fuck” (Sorry if this has already offended someone).

My question is: How much emphasis should be put on a rule for dealing with some people from some cultural contexts being offended by something being said here.

I’ll take it to the other extreme: There are countries in which females have no rights and are not allowed to participate in the work force or in large parts of society. If someone from such a country was to subscribe to this list — would we then start to remove all females from this list — because having females around _might_ offend them?

Seriously people, there’s a thing such as freedom of speech - and yes, a community and as such a mailing list can give itself rules, nothing against that. But it can be as simple as:

1. Don’t insult any person directly
2. Don’t insult anyone’s religion or gender or sexual orientation etc.
3. Don’t be a total dick

But that’s _about_ all it needs.

Kai

Mark Drew

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 2:53:47 AM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I agree with the points said by Kai. I think the groups needs no moderation, until it does. From previous experience with a couple of characters in a previous incarnation of these forums, 99.99% of the time you don't need it until someone oversteps the obvious boundary.

With regards to pinning the community guidelines I think Google groups has stopped allowing that.

I am not sure how we will handle it with Lucee but before we had community moderators (Todd Rafferty) that did a great job. Maybe if/when it is needed someone can be appointed again.

WRT off topic. If a conversation is off topic but beneficial to the community, great, let's keep it . But (again) we had questions about how to do CSS and fix JavaScript code what was better placed elsewhere that should be marked as off topic (this was in the old Railo group). It's all about the signal vs noise ratio IMO

Profanity. I am fucking torn on this bloody issue.
As long as you are not insulting someone it should be ok. But we want to be as inclusive as possible, that includes kids. Kids. Don't swear. Don't do as I do.
But we all have to agree that this isn't a pub. It's an office type environment (virtual as it may be) and a community that accepts everyone (including fledgling developers) and treats everyone with respect.


Mark Drew
- Sent by typing with my thumbs.

Adam Cameron

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 3:11:32 AM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
On 22 February 2015 at 20:53, Mark Drew <mark...@gmail.com> wrote:
 that includes kids. Kids. Don't swear. Don't do as I do.

I seriously wonder if any adult who thinks this is even remotely an issue was ever actually a kid.

-- 
Adam 

Mark Drew

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 3:40:54 AM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I certainly wasn't. I was created fully formed.



Mark Drew
- Sent by typing with my thumbs. 
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.

Adam Cameron

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 3:43:29 AM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
On 22 February 2015 at 21:40, Mark Drew <mark...@gmail.com> wrote:
I certainly wasn't. I was created fully formed.

And they definitely broke the mold before that one.

-- 
Adam 

Nando Breiter

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 7:10:26 AM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I think it is important to remember that for many folks here, English is a foreign language. I can tell you from first hand experience as an American living in the Italian speaking area of Switzerland that when folks here start slinging barbed comments about me around in Italian, which happens often, I have no idea how to respond, and feel confused as to the true intent. Yes, they want to suggest that I'm an idiot, an outsider, a foreigner, but even if they think it is just friendly joking, it comes across as quite hostile, and it hurts. Luckily, I don't have to deal with that over an email list, and on top of that try to work with these people, which would be all the more difficult!

On top of that, CFML, or in the future, the new Lucee dialect, may also be a language folks on this list don't know completely, well, or at all.

If I joined a Ruby mailing list, not knowing a thing about Ruby but having a desire to learn, and I encountered a lot of edgy, competitive banter (likely from a small clique of members), I would feel excluded in the sense that I would have no idea at all how to join in to such banter, and I also would not feel welcome to ask my newbie questions.

So I think the question of tone is this: Do we want to create an inclusive international community around Lucee, or an exclusive clique. To me, I don't think we can afford to be an exclusive clique. We'll go extinct that way. 

And I don't think this is about free speech. If that's the ideal, then everyone should be allowed to freely express their opinions, and sling their most barbed and colloquial arrows, in their native languages. 

It's about being intelligent regarding inclusiveness, over the limited medium of email (rather than face to face communication), in a common language that is foreign to many, regarding quite a complex subject, so that Lucee has a better chance to thrive.




Aria Media Sagl
Via Rompada 40
6987 Caslano
Switzerland

+41 (0)91 600 9601
+41 (0)76 303 4477 cell
skype: ariamedia

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.

Steven Durette

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 12:40:44 PM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
OT but because you asked:

Some anti-profanity laws were passed to shield women and children from foul-mouthed men. Consider this Michigan law: “Any person who shall use any indecent, immoral, obscene, vulgar or insulting language in the presence or hearing of any woman or child shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.”


Another Oklahoma law warns, “If any person shall utter or speak any obscene or lascivious language or word in any public place, or in the presence of females, or in the presence of children under ten (10) years of age, he shall be liable to a fine of not more than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), or imprisonment for not more than thirty (30) days, or both.”

Taken from http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/curses-blasphemy-profanity-laws-still-on-the-books


Sent from my iPhone
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.

ADK

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 2:23:55 PM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
You're reaching. Those are ancient "blue" laws. I believe that stealing a horse in the State of New York is still "technically" a hanging offense as well. Most laws, do not automatically sunset and so reside on the books as vestiges of a bygone era, they're not really enforced and if/when some hick sheriff tries to do so, it's thrown out/found to be unconstitutional/void as against public policy/etc.

Like programming languages, most bodies of law could really use a good practice of deprecation. Here in the US, the law is either sunset after a period of time, or gets officially overturned when some idiot tries to enforce it and the courts call BS.

Over the air communication in the US is still monitored/overseen by the FCC and so that is a different story, though not applicable here...

Julian Halliwell

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 2:31:04 PM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
Apparently that wouldn't happen because of:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MINASWAN

"Micha is nice and so we are nice"?

Mark Drew

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 3:09:26 PM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
That is awesome :) I like it.

Mark Drew
- Sent by typing with my thumbs.

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAC_5VooXjSp%2B5px7L-TGioTGnH5FyieA_nNBjt3gp-57y-ow-w%40mail.gmail.com.

Sean Corfield

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 3:46:57 PM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
Very cute but I've seen some pretty bad explosions from the Ruby community so, policy or not, it doesn't always solve the problem.

I've stayed out of this thread so far because it seems well-intentioned and "everyone should play nice" is a good goal for a community. I nearly jumped in at the "no code of conduct" point but as others have said, the proposed behavioral guidelines really _are_ a code of conduct and the core of most of the codes of conduct out there are about two things:

* Stating what is unacceptable behavior
* Stating what, if anything, will be done about someone violating the CoC

It's usually the second bullet that takes time but without it, the policy is just "empty words". A few people have hinted that moderation is what will be used to address the second point (insofar as putting a "violator" under moderation and ensuring future posts from them follow the guidelines).

That's all very reasonable but, as the discussion over swearing has shown, this _will_ need to be written down and posted somewhere prominent so that list members — and the community at large — know what's acceptable and what is not.

FWIW, I deal with CoCs quite a bit via conferences: I'm the person who introduced the concept to dev.Objective() — formerly cf.Objective(). I also try to stay informed about diversity issues (attending events like AlterConf, following Model View Culture, and so on) and I founded ClojureBridge as a effort to improve diversity in the Clojure community — following the lead of a former Macromedia colleague, Sarah Allen, who founded RailsBridge. It’s all a big learning curve and most white cishet men don’t even know what they don’t know about the subject — being inclusive is hard, but it’s important.

Most conference CoCs are based in some form on this one:

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Conference_anti-harassment/Policy

Note that whilst nearly all CoCs address "sexual language" (in addition to a long list of specific forms of harassment), they do not typically include swearing or profanity because that, in and of itself, is not harassment.

It was the inclusion of "No profanity or cuss/curse/swear words" as a discussion point that made me want to raise this, especially since several non-US members objected to that inclusion. As an ex-pat Brit, now an American citizen, I'm with Adam, Kai, Mark — profanity in and of itself should not be considered unacceptable behavior, as long as the _tone_ and intent is not exclusionary.

Sean

Matt Quackenbush

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 4:01:41 PM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Sean Corfield <se...@corfield.org> wrote:
Note that whilst nearly all CoCs address "sexual language" (in addition to a long list of specific forms of harassment), they do not typically include swearing or profanity because that, in and of itself, is not harassment.

It was the inclusion of "No profanity or cuss/curse/swear words" as a discussion point that made me want to raise this, especially since several non-US members objected to that inclusion. As an ex-pat Brit, now an American citizen, I'm with Adam, Kai, Mark — profanity in and of itself should not be considered unacceptable behavior, as long as the _tone_ and intent is not exclusionary.

Sean


I am an American, born and raised, and I am vehemently opposed to such a rule. In addition to everything Kai, Adam, Mark, and Sean have said, it boils down to this:
  • What's the list?
  • Who wrote it?
  • Why is a word that doesn't bother me (or you, or you, or you) on the list?
  • Why is a word that does bother me (or you, or you, or you) not on the list?

Simply stated, any such list is bullshit and has no place anywhere but a nanny state or perhaps some strict religious structure. I would certainly hope that this community would be neither of those.


Adam Cameron

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 4:37:02 PM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com


On Monday, 23 February 2015 06:40:44 UTC+13, Steven Durette wrote:
OT but because you asked:

Some anti-profanity laws were passed to shield women and children from foul-mouthed men. Consider this Michigan law: “Any person who shall use any indecent, immoral, obscene, vulgar or insulting language in the presence or hearing of any woman or child shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.”


Another Oklahoma law warns, “If any person shall utter or speak any obscene or lascivious language or word in any public place, or in the presence of females, or in the presence of children under ten (10) years of age, he shall be liable to a fine of not more than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), or imprisonment for not more than thirty (30) days, or both.”

Taken from http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/curses-blasphemy-profanity-laws-still-on-the-books


That's hilarious.

Sorry, I thought you meant new legislation to this effect. Not outdated stuff that simply hasn't been taken off the books yet.

-- 
Adam

Andrew Myers

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 7:06:17 PM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
The "no profanity" rule basically excludes any Australians from the *&^%ing list.
Message has been deleted

Kai Koenig

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 7:11:00 PM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
Bloody right, mate!

Adam Cameron

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 7:15:59 PM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
YIKES.

SORRY. I thought Andy had emailed me directly - it turned up in my "Andy" folder not my "Lucee" one. The other half of the message I am replying to is the one situation in which I think a given word is inappropriate. I used it for effect, and because of it's inappropriateness to demonstrate a point, and purely in an environment I thought was personal.

Can someone pls delete that (I can't see a way of retracting it myself).

FFS.

-- 
Adam


On Monday, 23 February 2015 13:10:18 UTC+13, Adam Cameron wrote:
And fuckin' Kiwis too.

 

Adam Cameron

unread,
Feb 22, 2015, 7:18:46 PM2/22/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
Ah... I think I've deleted it. Sorry if it makes its way into anyone's inbox.

-- 
Adam

Igal @ Lucee.org

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 12:52:50 AM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I will not address all of the points that were made in this thread, but
here are a few based on bits and pieces from the different messages:

1) of course that swearing is unprofessional. do you greet a new client
that comes into your office that way? do you talk like that to your
boss? at a job interview?

if someone came to me for an interview and started spewing profanity, I
would not hire him/her, because at the very least I know that they lack
self control. see also
http://dianegottsman.com/2013/02/cursing-at-work-replacing-profanity-with-professionalism/

2) every community (group, club, organization) has "code of conduct" or
"rules of what's acceptable", even if unwritten. that has nothing to do
with a "nanny state". for example, if you'd unzip your pants in the
middle of the office and start "watering" the plants -- you would be
thrown out immediately -- possibly get arrested.

3) most of us come to this forum for professional reasons -- to learn,
improve, share ideas, ask, answer, etc. -- when someone posts profanity
or other offensive thoughts then we have to read them if we want to stay
in the forum for professional reasons, and the person who posts that
forces it on us.

share it with your friends by email. tweet it where one can simply not
follow your posts. post it on your blog -- people who wants to read it
will, and people who do not, won't. but when you post it to the mailing
list here the only way for me to avoid it is to leave the mailing list,
which I really don't think that I should.

here's an idea -- open your own mailing list, invite your friends, and
post it there -- the people who want to communicate with you there will
opt in.

4) I'm no stranger to profanity. I probably know at least as many bad
words as the rest of you (possibly more, because I know bad words in
several languages). that doesn't mean that this public forum is the
place for them.

I'm a member of several mailing lists of major projects -- and I've
never seen the language there that I've seen here. most likely because
the first time you spew profanity on one of those lists your message
will be erased and you'll be kicked out.

5) last but not least (this is probably the most important one), this
forum is the "face of Lucee". if I were a new user who decided to check
out Lucee -- and I read some of the comments here -- I would not waste
another minute of my time on this mailing list, and possibly not on this
project.

this is something that the Lucee Association should think about very
carefully, as it can have serious implications on the future of the
project.

I think that Nando said it best when he wrote: "Do we want to create an
inclusive international community around Lucee, or an exclusive clique.
To me, I don't think we can afford to be an exclusive clique. We'll go
extinct that way."


Igal

p.s. you can disagree with what I wrote, but seriously, try to be mature
about it. I'm sure that you can do so without resorting to foul language.

Kai Koenig

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 1:18:57 AM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
Responses inline:

> I will not address all of the points that were made in this thread, but
> here are a few based on bits and pieces from the different messages:
>
> 1) of course that swearing is unprofessional. do you greet a new client
> that comes into your office that way? do you talk like that to your
> boss? at a job interview?
>
> if someone came to me for an interview and started spewing profanity, I
> would not hire him/her, because at the very least I know that they lack
> self control. see also
> http://dianegottsman.com/2013/02/cursing-at-work-replacing-profanity-with-professionalism/

I don’t agree with Mrs Gottsman, but that’s fair enough.

Your first examples (client/boss/job interview) are absolutely irrelevant for what’s being discussed here.

That is for various reasons, among them is:

- those people pay you money for playing by mostly their rules —> On this mailing list, most people contribute because they volunteer their time.

There are tons of other reasons why I think your comparisons have no relevance in this discussion, but I don’t want to spend my time writing them all up as I know we will disagree anyway.

> 2) every community (group, club, organization) has "code of conduct" or
> "rules of what's acceptable", even if unwritten. that has nothing to do
> with a "nanny state". for example, if you'd unzip your pants in the
> middle of the office and start "watering" the plants -- you would be
> thrown out immediately -- possibly get arrested.

If you were to read the emails in this thread again you’ll find that most people have no issue with an explicit or unwritten code of conduct.

What people have an issue with are in fact “nanny state” rules of which words are allowed and which not. Who’s gonna define the word list in your model btw? Just wondering …

> I'm a member of several mailing lists of major projects -- and I've
> never seen the language there that I've seen here. most likely because
> the first time you spew profanity on one of those lists your message
> will be erased and you'll be kicked out.

So, those mailing lists do have a word list? Are those rules documented somewhere.

> 5) last but not least (this is probably the most important one), this
> forum is the "face of Lucee". if I were a new user who decided to check
> out Lucee -- and I read some of the comments here -- I would not waste
> another minute of my time on this mailing list, and possibly not on this
> project.
>
> this is something that the Lucee Association should think about very
> carefully, as it can have serious implications on the future of the
> project.
>
> I think that Nando said it best when he wrote: "Do we want to create an
> inclusive international community around Lucee, or an exclusive clique.
> To me, I don't think we can afford to be an exclusive clique. We'll go
> extinct that way.”

Building an inclusive international community has 0 to do with in my opinion nanny-state profanity word filtering.

I’ll ask the question again: How far would you want to take adapting to the lowest common denominator? Banning females from the list to suit someone from a country where females are not supposed to take part in professional life and public society?

You seriously need to accept that there are other social norms outside of the US-level of being politically over-correct (*) — (*) (in my opinion very often the case)

Cheers,
Kai


Igal

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 1:50:11 AM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
it's very relevant -- it addresses Adam's statement: "It also presupposes there's some sort of inverse correlation between profanity and professionalism".

Sean Corfield

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 2:31:25 AM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I'm with Kai on this. And as I noted earlier, even Codes of Conduct specifically intended to create inclusive, welcoming spaces don't exclude "bad language" per se.

Sean

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--
Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
World Singles, LLC. -- http://worldsingles.com/

"Perfection is the enemy of the good."
-- Gustave Flaubert, French realist novelist (1821-1880)

ADK

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 2:32:27 AM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
the drama-to-substance ratio on this list is getting out of hand. So far since launch the hottest topics of discussion have been Google v. Discourse, FUD around CFML's future with Lucee, and international societal norms regarding profanity. How about we get back to the business at hand of creating software, eh?

On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 9:30:06 AM UTC-8, Alex Skinner wrote:
Hi,

I want to support a vibrant community for the Lucee list but at times the tone and interactions on here are really not acceptable. Usually, this is a handful of people being louder than most.

The Association and its members should not be fielding complaints regarding this list or spending effort in that regard.

I want this list to be approachable to all contributors, new and old, and that people of all levels be that:

1. English as a first language
2. Experience of CFML and programming in general
3. Confidence in writing or self-confidence possibly. 

That everyone is comfortable contributing and are not going to get shot down.

Like all communities we decide the environment we create.

I for one see no benefit in the time associated with creating a code of conduct like we see at certain conferences, we are all adults and know how to behave.

I also don't think this should be a moderated list but can I ask that if threads turn into an off topic discussion involving just a few individuals that you take the discussion elsewhere.

If people leave the list or put the list on digest because they want to filter some of this stuff then to me it's not just them that loses out.

In general terms, I feel really positive about Lucee, the progress and how the community has rallied around it.

Cheers

Alex

--
Alex Skinner
Managing Director

Pixl8 Interactive, 3 Tun Yard, Peardon Street, London
SW8 3HT, United Kingdom



T: +44 [0] 845 260 0726 W: www.pixl8.co.uk E: in...@pixl8.co.uk




Follow us on: Facebook Twitter LinkedIn



CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED - This e-mail and any attachment is intended solely for the addressee, is strictly confidential and may also be subject to legal, professional or other privilege or may be protected by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you are not the addressee please do not read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on it or any attachments. Instead, please email it back to the sender and then immediately permanently delete it. Pixl8 Interactive Ltd Registered in England. Registered number: 04336501. Registered office: 8 Spur Road, Cosham, Portsmouth, Hampshire, PO6 3EB

Michael Offner

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 3:36:23 AM2/23/15
to lucee
I like heated debates a lot because I strongly believe that the best solution comes out of a compromise.
People that care about the topic get heated in discussions and that is great, if they are wrong or not does not matter because the true is mostly in the middle anyway ...

The problems are not the words itself, to problem is what you are doing with this words.
For me this discussion is only about one thing "Respect"!

Only because someone does not share your opinion does not mean he is a fool, fight as hard as you can for your opinion, but don't get personal to your opponent, show a little bit of respect!

I don't think that being a little bit respectful undermines your freedom of speech or does it?

Be nice
Micha


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.

Matt Quackenbush

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 9:03:35 AM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com


On Feb 23, 2015 2:36 AM, "Michael Offner" <mic...@lucee.org> wrote:
>
> The problems are not the words itself, to problem is what you are doing with this words.

Precisely what Kai, Adam, Sean, myself and others have said.

> For me this discussion is only about one thing "Respect"!
>
> Only because someone does not share your opinion does not mean he is a fool, fight as hard as you can for your opinion, but don't get personal to your opponent, show a little bit of respect!
>

Again, this is exactly what we've been saying. It seems that the only ones who disagree are Alex and Igal. They seem to believe that respect includes a specific list of taboo words, and that those words and professionalism/respect are mutually exclusive, which, of course, they are not.

> Be nice
> Micha
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:32 AM, ADK <and...@leftbower.com> wrote:
>>
>> the drama-to-substance ratio on this list is getting out of hand. So far since launch the hottest topics of discussion have been Google v. Discourse, FUD around CFML's future with Lucee, and international societal norms regarding profanity. How about we get back to the business at hand of creating software, eh?
>>
>> On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 9:30:06 AM UTC-8, Alex Skinner wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I want to support a vibrant community for the Lucee list but at times the tone and interactions on here are really not acceptable. Usually, this is a handful of people being louder than most.
>>>
>>> The Association and its members should not be fielding complaints regarding this list or spending effort in that regard.
>>>
>>> I want this list to be approachable to all contributors, new and old, and that people of all levels be that:
>>>
>>> 1. English as a first language
>>> 2. Experience of CFML and programming in general
>>> 3. Confidence in writing or self-confidence possibly. 
>>>
>>> That everyone is comfortable contributing and are not going to get shot down.
>>>
>>> Like all communities we decide the environment we create.
>>>
>>> I for one see no benefit in the time associated with creating a code of conduct like we see at certain conferences, we are all adults and know how to behave.
>>>
>>> I also don't think this should be a moderated list but can I ask that if threads turn into an off topic discussion involving just a few individuals that you take the discussion elsewhere.
>>>
>>> If people leave the list or put the list on digest because they want to filter some of this stuff then to me it's not just them that loses out.
>>>
>>> In general terms, I feel really positive about Lucee, the progress and how the community has rallied around it.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Alex
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alex Skinner
>>> Managing Director
>>>

>>> Pixl8 Interactive, 3 Tun Yard, Peardon Street, London
>>> SW8 3HT, United Kingdom
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> T: +44 [0] 845 260 0726• W: www.pixl8.co.uk• E: in...@pixl8.co.uk
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

>>> Follow us on: Facebook Twitter LinkedIn


>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED - This e-mail and any attachment is intended solely for the addressee, is strictly confidential and may also be subject to legal, professional or other privilege or may be protected by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you are not the addressee please do not read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on it or any attachments. Instead, please email it back to the sender and then immediately permanently delete it. Pixl8 Interactive Ltd Registered in England. Registered number: 04336501. Registered office: 8 Spur Road, Cosham, Portsmouth, Hampshire, PO6 3EB
>>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/cdf1d649-9148-452f-a83d-b6c7cf2309bb%40googlegroups.com.
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAG%2BEEBwcHeHmVVndWDWcDD2%3D1vPk3sG-VSyBc2N-B7aDZD8RMg%40mail.gmail.com.

Steven Durette

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 9:07:38 AM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
***** snip
There are tons of other reasons why I think your comparisons have no relevance in this discussion, but I don’t want to spend my time writing them all up as I know we will disagree anyway.
**** end snip

Kai, how about this one, you try to talk a client into Lucee as the app server and they do some research and find that the official list is unprofessional and therefore decide not to adopt it.



>

Andrew Penhorwood

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 9:10:31 AM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I am sure there are others who share Igal & Alex's viewpoint.  I would rather avoid some words in the communications in these forums.  There are many more people who read these post then who post to them.  We will just have to agree to disagree on that point.  I would like to get back to the matter at hand which is creating Lucee.

Andrew Penhorwood 

spills

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 10:16:59 AM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I would say, enthusiastic, passionate and colorful debate would win em over!

Alex Skinner

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 1:17:09 PM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
@Matt and Andrew

I think you should both reread my original posting, I'm not sure, in this case that my views are that aligned with Igals per say, I didn't for a second suggest that profanity was relevant and I would be in favour of a light touch low bureaucracy approach to this. I actually said... 

"I for one see no benefit in the time associated with creating a code of conduct like we see at certain conferences, we are all adults and know how to behave."

I think Kai's posting summed it up very well and I think Micha adding the respect element is important.

My original posting was not to suggest that we need guidelines but more to say I could see something brewing and wanted to nip it in the bud before we got overly restrictive over the top guidelines as a knee-jerk reaction in response or some level of moderation.

The list is an environment that just reflects real life, people swear, I don't personally think it's unprofessional I think it's when it gets aimed at individuals or there is a lack of respect that its an issue. 

I'm sure communities exist in their relative bubbles where the world is free from expletives but this is a global list and Adam and Kai have already said certain cultures use certain words like punctuation so I'm not looking to add censorship to the list.

Let's be honest we all know when a comment is barbed or aimed at someone, there is the risk that the recipient who doesn't have English as a first language may misunderstand or take offence as they don't get the subtly of what is being said.

So as I started this can I list the following 5 elements which i've picked from the responses as guidelines, and see if we can actually put them in the signature of posts.

1. Don’t insult any person directly
2. Don’t insult anyone’s religion, gender or sexual orientation.
3. Be respectful and more specifically don’t be a total idiot
4. Try to be nurturing in your responses
5. Try to be mindful of not using colourful language as some may take offence

Anyway Lucee 5 who is excited about that, what's the feature you're most looking forward to?

Cheers

Alex



For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--
Alex Skinner
Managing Director

Pixl8 Interactive, 3 Tun Yard, Peardon Street, London
SW8 3HT, United Kingdom



T: +44 [0] 845 260 0726 W: www.pixl8.co.uk E: in...@pixl8.co.uk




Follow us on: Facebook Twitter LinkedIn

Igal @ Lucee.org

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 2:07:10 PM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I'm actually not disagreeing either.

yes, I still think it's unprofessional to use bad language in the public forum, and I still agree with Nando, Steven, and others that it can hurt the project (and the developers whose careers' revolve around it), but that's something that the Lucee Association should decide on because it reflects directly on the project.

my main beef here was when Adam told me to "fuck off" (on Feb 13th), which violates items 1, 3, 4, and 5 on your new list.  Adam and I rarely agree on things, and that is fine, but he had absolutely no reason (nor right) to talk to me like that, nor for me to "accept it".

my response to Adam was also very unprofessional, of course, but I only responded that way because there is no other way of addressing this issue.

now, if we all agree that Adam's comment (as well as my reply to it, of course) is unacceptable -- then let's move forward -- we should post this list somewhere and point to it with a warning when someone violates it.  multiple offenses would be dealt with differently. 

but if anyone thinks that it's ok to talk to other members this way (or maybe it's only ok because it wasn't said to you) then we still have a problem here.


Igal

Alex Skinner

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 2:27:24 PM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
Answers inline
On 23 February 2015 at 19:06, Igal @ Lucee.org <ig...@lucee.org> wrote:
I'm actually not disagreeing either.
yes, I still think it's unprofessional to use bad language in the public forum, and I still agree with Nando, Steven, and others that it can hurt the project (and the developers whose careers' revolve around it), but that's something that the Lucee Association should decide on because it reflects directly on the project.

I think having broad guidelines is as far as it should go the Lucee association has more pressing issues to expend its limited resource on.
 
my main beef here was when Adam told me to "fuck off" (on Feb 13th), which violates items 1, 3, 4, and 5 on your new list.  Adam and I rarely agree on things, and that is fine, but he had absolutely no reason (nor right) to talk to me like that, nor for me to "accept it".

my response to Adam was also very unprofessional, of course, but I only responded that way because there is no other way of addressing this issue.

Well I think the term violation and offenses is wrong these aren't laws and we're not in a position to play inforcers, we're talking about a set of guidelines to try and subtly jolt people into not writing things that are going to get under each others skin or otherwise cause offense, and in the case where it clearly has then it sounds like an offline chat between you in this case might be the way forward ? 
 
now, if we all agree that Adam's comment (as well as my reply to it, of course) is unacceptable -- then let's move forward -- we should post this list somewhere and point to it with a warning when someone violates it.  multiple offenses would be dealt with differently. 

but if anyone thinks that it's ok to talk to other members this way (or maybe it's only ok because it wasn't said to you) then we still have a problem here.

I think 1-5 covers it nicely and tbh there is nothing stopping individuals taking their conversations offline if the content ceases to be off general benefit to the wider audience. 

Back to whoever came up the with the analogy that If we were all sitting in a pub, office or any other environment and a contingent of those in the room were bickering they'd most likely be quite directly told to go outside and sort it out between them I see this as no different.

Cheers

Alex
 

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Igal @ Lucee.org

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 2:40:35 PM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
so you still won't say that it's unacceptable for users to talk to each other like this on the list?  this was not an offline conversation -- this was on the public list.

I just showed you that 4 out of the 5 items on your list were ...  broken (call it whatever you want), but you still won't say that it's unacceptable?  really?? 

this is not a theoretical question.  it's a very specific one.  I realize that Adam works with you and that he is your friend, but try to be objective and take the names out of the discussion.  today it's Adam and me, tomorrow it's someone else, possibly you.

I would also like to hear what Matt and Kai have to say about this, especially since Kai came up with the basis of this new list.


Igal

Alex Skinner

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 2:56:40 PM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
Igal,

Whether or not I think its acceptable is not the issue. Would I tell you to F^&*k off, no I wouldn't. I'm mildly irritated at present but still decidedly British about it :)

The question itself is entirely rhetorical, you can see that I thought enough about it to start this post so it's pretty obvious that I'm not overjoyed by the tone of posts on this list recently. 

Items 1-5 on that list are pretty clear as to let's think about what we write. And no, I'm not getting into calling up individuals or individual examples, I'm not looking to point fingers I'm looking to improve things, we're not at school.

But conversely as professionals if you have a particular issue with an individual I think its right to take it offline or not, its really up to you.

Let's just say we didn't previously have any written guidelines, we have a list now let's see how we go.

Alex



For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Matt Quackenbush

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 3:03:40 PM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 1:06 PM, Igal @ Lucee.org <ig...@lucee.org> wrote:
yes, I still think it's unprofessional to use bad language in the public forum,


My issue is someone (anyone, myself included) mandating to others what is or is not "bad language". That's the extent of it for me.

 
my main beef here was when Adam told me to "fuck off" (on Feb 13th), which violates items 1, 3, 4, and 5 on your new list.  Adam and I rarely agree on things, and that is fine, but he had absolutely no reason (nor right) to talk to me like that, nor for me to "accept it".

my response to Adam was also very unprofessional, of course, but I only responded that way because there is no other way of addressing this issue.

now, if we all agree that Adam's comment (as well as my reply to it, of course) is unacceptable -- then let's move forward -- we should post this list somewhere and point to it with a warning when someone violates it.  multiple offenses would be dealt with differently. 


I don't remember seeing that, but hearing that it took place doesn't exactly surprise me, given the players. :P  Anyway, yes, I agree that such a thing is improper and should not be occurring. But to be clear, my issue with what you've described is not the choice of words used, but rather the manner in which they were used.

As Micha said, "it's about respect".

There isn't a word I've heard that offends me. But even so-called innocuous words/phrases can be said in such a way that it is completely offensive. As I've always told my kids, "It's not what you say, but it's how the fuck you say it. Be respectful, even when you disagree."

 

but if anyone thinks that it's ok to talk to other members this way (or maybe it's only ok because it wasn't said to you) then we still have a problem here.


No, I do not think the situation you described (again, I don't recall it happening) is OK, whether that's here or "in real life".


Matt Quackenbush

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 3:04:38 PM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com


On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Alex Skinner <al...@pixl8.co.uk> wrote:
@Matt and Andrew

I think you should both reread my original posting, I'm not sure, in this case that my views are that aligned with Igals per say, I didn't for a second suggest that profanity was relevant and I would be in favour of a light touch low bureaucracy approach to this. I actually said... 

"I for one see no benefit in the time associated with creating a code of conduct like we see at certain conferences, we are all adults and know how to behave."


Sorry 'bout lumping you in on that, Alex. My mistake.

Igal @ Lucee.org

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 3:07:13 PM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
I'm way past the "mildly irritated" point, but I really don't think that I deserve credit for not using the F-word here.

Igal @ Lucee.org

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 3:08:33 PM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
thank you for your honesty.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.

Kai Koenig

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 3:16:07 PM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
My opinion:

It’s not unacceptable at all for people to use what some folks here call “profanities” in a generic manner, e.g. “for fucks sake, can we please all get back on topic” or “I think this concept is total bollocks” etc. 

It becomes unacceptable if used in ways such as: “Igal, fuck off” or “Adam, fuck off yourself”.

When it comes to items 4 and 5 on Alex list, I’m fine with them as they clearly give suggestions (“try…”). I might or might not try but I might not succeed, that’s life for everyone.

I will clearly not participate in an email list with a general profanity/swear word list that gets policed by someone and where we talk about violations and offences. That sounds frankly kind of ridiculous and nanny-/police-state to me.

And that’s about all I have to say on the topic.

Cheers
Kai



Matt Quackenbush

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 3:17:52 PM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
+infinity

Nando Breiter

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 3:18:11 PM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Igal @ Lucee.org <ig...@lucee.org> wrote:
so you still won't say that it's unacceptable for users to talk to each other like this on the list?  this was not an offline conversation -- this was on the public list.
 
I can say it, and mean it. It was unacceptable. Perhaps Adam would be gracious enough to give you call and apologize, and perhaps you can do the same when and if he calls you?

It's unacceptable, to me, because it does not foster cooperation. I don't think Adam would behave that way with you in person. I met him at CFCamp, and he looked more like a cuddly teddy bear than a ferocious grizzly, at least to me. I think he just got carried away in his own echo chamber, passionate about his opinion.


Igal @ Lucee.org

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 3:31:36 PM2/23/15
to lu...@googlegroups.com
thank you.  there's really no need to apologize as long as it doesn't happen again.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lucee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lu...@googlegroups.com.

Adam Cameron

unread,
Feb 23, 2015, 4:30:40 PM2/23/15