| 5 Nov 2021 |
 Irenes | it's obvious, from looking at his efforts in PR review, that he has a huge amount of enthusiasm | 02:15:26 |
| Irenes | he's reviewed two of my PRs, in fact | 02:15:35 |
 tomberek | All of us can become shepherds, you can. And part of it would be to get an idea of what the community thinks. Let's narrow down on the "didn’t comment because there was nothing to change". | 02:15:36 |
| Irenes | tomberek: I think the information on the thread is most of what exists on that topic, so I don't know what I can answer for you, but go ahead and ask | 02:16:21 |
| Irenes | I think anyone who's as enthusiastic as sandro is is an asset to the community | 02:16:38 |
| Irenes | it's just about recognizing that this is a team effort | 02:16:44 |
| Irenes | that's all I've ever hoped for, with regard to him | 02:16:52 |
| tomberek | What possibilities did you assess? What other reasons do you think about and dismiss? | 02:16:55 |
| Irenes | and that's all I want to say about sandro, because I don't really feel comfortable saying stuff about someone who barely knows me | 02:17:13 |
 @jonringer:matrix.org | I barely know tom, and I barely know you. I just consider myself a part of the Nix community | 02:17:47 |
| Irenes | tomberek: sorry, what possibilities for what? the views that people have on the RFC? | 02:17:51 |
| Irenes | sure | 02:18:04 |
| Irenes | well, we're getting to know each other now | 02:18:09 |
| Irenes | I wish it could be in a better context | 02:18:14 |
| @jonringer:matrix.org | As long as I feel like we all of have Nix as the first priority. I can tolerate some behavior that I may not agree with. But having other people tell me how I should act, say, or think is not making Nix a priority. It's making their narrative a priority. | 02:19:23 |
| tomberek | I'm focusing down on the "didn’t comment because there was nothing to change". What else did you consider? | 02:19:42 |
| Irenes | tomberek: I'm expressing my summary of a complicated situation in which many people believe many different things | 02:20:02 |
| Irenes | I could give you a better answer if I understand the purpose of the question | 02:20:13 |
| Irenes | are you trying to audit my thought process for the purpose of building trust? | 02:20:21 |
| Irenes | are you trying to show me that I could be wrong? | 02:20:25 |
| @jonringer:matrix.org | I feel like I'm starting to repeat myself, so I'm going to try and make up some work. | 02:20:37 |
| Irenes | I know I could be wrong, and I acknowledge that. it's a subjective assessment. | 02:20:38 |
| Irenes | jonringer: thank you again for your time, and I'm sorry to make you do all this. | 02:20:54 |
| tomberek | ( Irenes I am purposefully doing this in a manner of asking questions about things that confuse me, or that I don't understand. If my manner is odd, that is why. I'm not trying to be rude or condecending. ) | 02:21:20 |
| Irenes | I'm going to try more radical honesty in the hope that you may react better to it. I'm not sure I believe that you're not trying to be condescending, but I accept your statement at face value for the purpose of discussion. | 02:22:08 |
| Irenes | I don't remember the details of my thought process that you're asking about, the GitHub discussion was quiet for weeks. | 02:23:00 |
| Irenes | I also don't understand why my thought process matters to you, and I could do a better job of volunteering helpful information if I did. | 02:23:47 |
| Irenes | We are very different people, and that means that, first, the best way to communicate may be short and to-the point remarks, but, second, we are each at strong risk of misreading brevity as hostility. | 02:24:18 |
| Irenes | For the removal of doubt, I'm not upset with you right now. | 02:24:58 |
| Irenes | I understand that this is an important topic and that disagreement about it isn't personal. | 02:25:08 |
