On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 01:40:03PM +0100, Salve J Nilsen wrote: > I think _some_ kind of shaming should be allowed. Carrots are good, but > sticks work too when applied in a respectable fashion. They might, but a "hall of shame" ain't respectable. If I were on the list, then it would just make me think "cpants is run by a bunch of cunts, so i'll just ignore them". > But taking down the hall of shame smells awefully like the chinese press > rules ("We are only allowed to publish _good_ news about ourselves!") There's plenty of bad things said on CPANTS still - I have angry red marks against my name for all sorts of things. But I don't mind, because they're backed up with an explanation. Saying "DCANTRELL is a bad programmer and should be ashamed of himself" will merely make me think less of you. But saying "DCANTRELL didn't include a changelog in some of his distributions, we think that's bad because ..." is called Constructive Criticism. Of course, that doesn't mean I'm paying any attention, but at least I haven't dismissed CPANTS as the work of ill-mannered lunatics. -- David Cantrell | Reality Engineer, Ministry of Information You can't spell "slaughter" without "laughter"