Sorry for what appears to be an off topic posts.
These emails were part of a non-xfs related conversation
that was forwarded to list by Peter Grandi.
While I did write these emails I did not sent them to the list.
If any additional emails on this topic show up they will not have come
directly from me.
On 4/5/12 7:44 PM, Russell Cattelan wrote:
> Well I'm afraid I'm going to respectfully disagree.
> I don't have the full story of everything that happened
> but none of the post you pointed out are totally off topic.
> There seems to be some question about what you have said previously
> about XFS, which to me would seem on topic.
> I have forwarded your email to Christoph and the other prominent members
> of the XFS team and if they feel further action is warranted we
> can revisit the issue. Based on what you have sent I do
> not feel there is grounds for action.
> On 4/5/12 7:20 PM, Peter Grandi wrote:
>>> You must be joking! I'm not about to ban one of the most
>>> knowledgeable and productive xfs developers from the email
>> Well, if one of these guys post offtopic and malicious rants, I
>> guess that his being an XFS developer should not matter.
>> With being an XFS developer comes also some responsibility to
>> maintain a technical and professional tone in the XFS mailing
>> list, and not to abuse his position. Same for the others.
>>> I see nothing particularly offensive about these posts.
>> They personal attacks about competence and character. They are
>> pure flames, and because they are coordinated they seem to be
>> To me, you seem to be expliciting endorsing the use of the XFS
>> mailing list to publish "ad hominem" attacks and mobbing.
>>> I can understand you may upset about what Christoph said but
>>> he has every right to state his opinions on things no matter
>>> how much you disagree.
>> But his opinions are on offtopic "things": the topic of the XFS
>> mailing list is XFS, not people's competence or character, or
>> rants/attacks on people.
>> Some of the links I have sent you contain no technical content,
>> purely personal attacks. How can this be legitimate XFS content?
>> I think that it is your responsbility to ensure that posts are
>> kept ontopic, and you assume responsibility for their content
> xfs mailing list