On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 4:24 AM Jonathan Wakely via Std-Proposals
<std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2024, 06:01 Gašper Ažman via Std-Proposals, <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
>>
>> Tiago,
>>
>> Please display some patience with people, and assume good faith.
>>
>> People who take the time to write to this list might not have done enough work to warrant committee time, but are usually the influencers within their organisations because of their enthusiasm.
>>
>> C++ is a large language - helping people here will spread your teaching wide.
>>
>> Let's cultivate a nurturing community.
>
>
> At some point we do have to accept that this poster is just spamming the list with half baked nonsense.
Agreed.
I believe in the assumption of good faith. But month after month of
nonsense makes it clear that the OP is not posting in good faith.
Assuming good faith does *not* mean continuing to tolerate poor
behavior just because the poster *might* say something meaningful.
Tolerating proven bad actors only leads to getting more of them.
I wouldn't necessarily conclude bad faith.
On occasion this OP has had decent ideas, so I don't think he's coming up with bad proposals intentionally to troll us. He proposes ideas for features he finds useful, but is having trouble grasping the principles that the rest of the community apply to determining whether a feature should be added to the standard (and what form such a feature should take).
The OP might find it helpful to read over a bunch of the proposals that folks have formally submitted in the mailings, and pay special attention to sections that explain why certain directions were not pursued, such as syntax choices that the authors found unsuitable. And maybe listen in on sessions of EWG and LEWG at an upcoming WG21 meeting as a guest, to see the kind of feedback that they get from the audience.
--
Std-Proposals mailing list
Std-Proposals@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals