community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Niclas Hedhman <hedh...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Advice for community participation to lower tension
Date Sat, 09 Apr 2016 12:44:37 GMT
Don't count on it... Too much to do.
On Apr 9, 2016 18:20, "Ulrich Stärk" <uli@spielviel.de> wrote:

> Thanks Niclas!
>
> Any chance you can find the time to put this up at community.apache.org?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Uli
>
> On 09/04/16 03:50, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> > Everyone,
> > recently there was some tension/friction in a community, and I posted the
> > following advice to everyone to better get along. Not only did the
> > community members responded positively, but I also got pinged privately
> to
> > make this available publicly, so here it is, and I will let the wider
> > community do with it what it sees fit...
> >
> >
> > First a few general guidelines;
> >   a. Assume that the other party agrees more than disagrees with you. We
> > tend to leave out agreements and focus on differences. Sometime this is
> > forgotten and escalation becomes absurd for no rational reason.
> >
> >   b. When in doubt, assume that you are interpreting the message wrongly
> > and kindly ask for verification that you understood a particular topic
> well.
> >
> >   c. When writing, assume that every sentence will be misinterpreted.
> > Review and try to reformulate to be as clear as possible.
> >
> >   d. Use a submissive tone in all writing. Instead of the strong "In my
> > opinion, we must..." or the quite neutral "I think we should...", try to
> > use "Maybe we should consider..." or "Another idea that we could..."
> >
> >    e. If you disagree strongly with an email sent, tag it Important, then
> > put it aside. Read it half a day later again. Put it aside. Read it again
> > next day, and then it is easier to write a balanced and inviting
> response,
> > instead of the initial vitriol that flows through us when we get upset. I
> > found that sometimes a response wouldn't be necessary, as the importance
> > was actually much lower than originally perceived, and I would be able to
> > work "with", instead of "against", a given change.
> >
> >   f. Be forgiving and accept different priorities. The other person is
> not
> > out to get you or attack your work. More often than not, it is one of the
> > above (a-d) that are failing, or that the other person prioritize some
> > aspect higher than you do. Sometimes, this requires compromises,
> sometimes
> > not and the different priorities can co-exist.
> >
> >
> > Most communities at Apache consists of level-headed, reasonable people,
> who
> > have a strong vested interest in its Apache project. This interest, often
> > passion, is both the source of tension, but it is also what unites the
> > people within the community. It is easy to forget the vast amount of
> > agreement that exists, and get upset over relatively small disagreements.
> > Ability to put that aside, or downplay the importance, will ensure a
> > harmonious project.
> >
> > Face-to-Face is excellent way to eliminate disagreements, but that is
> often
> > not practical. Consider Skype or Google Hangout, just for the social
> aspect
> > of being part of this community. It should not be formal, and the
> > invitation should go out to everyone, perhaps someone want to make a
> short
> > presentation of what he/she is doing, to have some "structure", but that
> > might not be needed either. Once we have a face to the words, and a
> general
> > idea how that person is socially, we are much more capable to interact by
> > email.
> >
> >
> > Cheers
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message