Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:76142
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.192.49 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <67df3067bba9b3a36b6fb3aad2268cdf@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABBJUpdLqn_gfUbBUAd=WzzEbBCvuU9ZziNgbNSCbVPRrGSAzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH-PCH7vLV0To4VGj4HSoTG6wxTgBY+R6BJrtHjCjcDR3oCrRw@mail.gmail.com>
	<942ad7fad321579d0a2dc97511f01053@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABFWAErq0gFk8=iL3C2Owggfd60ZZBbzyXmMu8JnqZ6n4UBC6Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<67df3067bba9b3a36b6fb3aad2268cdf@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 22:16:49 +0200
Message-ID: <CABFWAEpWg3bNDHwY2-v_-jJqO60=y+s1K2X1jQ8Gv9cURJnwQA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>
Cc: Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com>, Laruence <laruence@php.net>, 
	PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] About PHP NG "document lacking" argument
From: phpwnd@gmail.com (Josh Davis)

On 25 July 2014 16:06, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote:

> I'd prefer that over a non-vague and very public character assassination
> that me and others are experiencing instead.

I cannot comment on that statement but character assassination is bad
either way, sure.

> I'm also wondering why you're replying to me, when it's Ferenc that made the
> statement (that I backed).  Ferenc, as an 'innocent bystander', sees things
> the way they are in a non-biased way.  I think most active participants here
> know exactly what he's talking about.

I did write a piquant response to Ferenc Kovacs's mail, I just didn't
send it. I didn't send it because I estimated it would do more harm
than good. I replied to your mail because you tried to have it both
way, and I felt someone had to call it. You backed Ferenc Kovacs's
vague accusatory statement while trying to take the high road by
claiming you didn't want to "participate in this game." If you're so
reluctant, just don't press "Send." But if you press "Send" you have
responsibility for it.

Your comment that an 'innocent bystander' sees things in a non-biased
way strikes me as odd; Bias exists in everyone. Do you think it's
possible that you find Ferenc Kovacs's opinion unbiased because it
matches yours? What if another innocent bystander expresses concerns
about the lack of communication surrounding the development of PHPNG?

During heated debates in mailing lists in general, and perhaps this
one in particular, there is an echo chamber effect that makes the
opinion of the most vocal participants seem truer due to repetition.
Regardless, that last statement seems to be an argument by consensus
or "argumentum ad populum" for the pedants.

I'm sorry that this debate is hampered by personal attacks, vague
accusations and clique mentality. I wish it will eventually rise above
it. I wish there were fewer messages like this one and more about ways
to remediate the situation.