- This topic has 9 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
We kind of suck as a community when it comes to dealing with people who derail the project with anger/aggression/agendas. I don’t mean people who dissent and work toward mutually satisfactory outcomes, I mean people who throw tantrums when they don’t get what they want and stir up controversy that causes everyone else to stop working to pay attention, which slows down the project, kills morale, and in some cases loses us valuable contributors. Looking at the classic talk on how to deal with poisonous people in an open source project, maybe we could discuss where the line is that would cause us to tell someone it’s time to move on, and what that process would look like.
+ 1. I would also like to discuss the case when a meetup/WordCamp organizer is falling behind with event organization tasks and not taking enough responsibility for the job being done. While not the classical case of poisonous people, I believe it matches this conversation as such cases slow down the organization of an event, which is part of the project anyways, so believe worth discussing it too.
@tinakesova: I think it does fall in with this topic perfectly. When someone makes a commitment but doesn’t follow through, other people have to stop what they’re doing to pick up the slack and it prevents progress on their own commitments. Someone can be the nicest person in the world but still poison to a project. That’s really the bigger problem we have… if someone’s a total jerk it’s much easier to tell them to move on than if everyone loves them.
+1 – I agree with everything in this thread. Dealing with project squatters is even harder than dealing with people who are outright horrible, especially if said squatter is someone you really like.
- The forum ‘Community Summit Discussion Topics’ is closed to new topics and replies.