User @Robson abruptly closing/locking valid/useful PRs w/ no feedback
Closed this issue · 8 comments
Sup @matiassingers check out what @Robson is doing here cuz I upset him by (civilly) disagreeing:
#273 - Added adamlui/ai-web-extensions README
#275 - Added KudoAI/chatgpt.js README
I've been nothing but respectful, so he is unjustly retaliating by abusing power to abruptly lock useful/valid PRs/issues which hurts your brand, since you would gain more exposure otherwise if your repos are more epic the more valid awesome READMEs are included
@Robson please don't close this valid issue it is a highly disruptive abuse of power (also Matias may be AWOL now but he will eventually read this, imagine what it will reflect about you if you do it, please don't do it)
In my reply I praised the readme and I made it clear that I view it as high-quality. It's just a different type of readme to the ones we have here, so I don't feel like it's a match. I even said there's nothing wrong with it, in case there was doubt. I know from historical PRs that Matias has been selective about including readmes for a variety of reasons, so I have continued his approach. I could have just said "no, thanks" instead of my reply, but I put a lot more effort in and declined in the kindest way. This isn't necessary, because nobody is owed a line in this repository, but I did it anyway because it's the respectful thing to do.
I looked at the reply and saw that was coming from a place where the kindest decline had not been accepted. I see from other people's conversations that replying to comments in that structure/tone is unproductive for everyone, so I didn't engage. I am the only person left maintaining this repository, which means nobody else would be merging the PR in, so to save time I just closed the PR, instead of closing it in a week/month/year. I keep the place tidy and that's why there's always so few PRs open.
I had moved on, but then another reply came with an accusation and insult. I have no interest in dealing with anyone with the displayed behaviours. I won't merge in any PR from someone like that because they are a liability. So the most efficient path is to just close that person's PRs for the safety of our users. I had thought that would lead to the person moving on, but instead it led to even more replies from them and now this Issue from them. All other PR submitters have been great to work with, so this is new territory for me.
I believe in the mission here and it's rewarding to have people submit compatible readmes and then get them merged in. It's a win for everyone. I'll often submit a PR to them with little improvements for their readme, to help them make it even more awesome, because that helps everyone as well.
That's all I have to say, so I won't post any further responses unless they are to someone else. I will leave this open for a week in case Matias wants to make a decision/comment. I don't want to leave unresolved PRs in the repository forever, so I will apply this week-rule to #277 as well. Matias can always reopen these things if he wants to.
In #273 (comment) I praised the readme and I made it clear that I view it as high-quality. It's just a different type of readme to the ones we have here, so I don't feel like it's a match. I even said there's nothing wrong with it, in case there was doubt. I know from historical PRs that Matias has been selective about including readmes for a variety of reasons, so I have continued his approach. I could have just said "no, thanks" instead of my reply, but I put a lot more effort in and declined in the kindest way. This isn't necessary, because nobody is owed a line in this repository, but I did it anyway because it's the respectful thing to do.
Actually you said "If we do add this" so you hadn't declined yet, only when I followed w/ "Sorry I meant @matiassingers's README (didn't realize you're not the owner)" did you blatantly flex your power to show you can close PRs w/o his consent (and w/o feedback as my title correctly reveals, including next PR #275) where you not only closed, but locked it to ensure I could not ever re-open, obviously because I had upset you for making you seem highly illogical in my reply (specifically that your excluding monorepos is somehow beneficial to Matias or potential README authors who naturally also need index READMEs for influence)
I looked at #273 (comment) and saw that was coming from a place where the kindest decline had not been accepted
I repeat, you didn't decline, you said "If we do accept this." So my reply addressed every single one of your strange concerns in a highly logical manner to work towards your insinuation acceptance is a possibility (your words not mine)
I see from other people's conversations that replying to comments in that structure/tone is unproductive for everyone, so I didn't engage.
What other people, and replying in what structure/tone is unproductive to build this repo w/ great READMEs? Quoting your lines for specificity?
I am the only person left maintaining this repository...
How come
...which means nobody else would be merging the PR in, so to save time I just closed the PR, instead of closing it in a week/month/year. I keep the place tidy and that's why there's always so few PRs open.
You literally revealed it is still opened to acceptance though, so that is obviously not the reason (otherwise you can keep it tidy by closing it int he first place).
Again I remind you (your words not mine) you stated "If we were to accept this" (also explicitly stated you are keeping it open) but only after I tagged the person that gave you this responsibility did you overreact and bizarrely and with no warning, close and lock the PR, like you were so pissed I went over your head, instead of reading it correctly that it was a genuine apology I called this repo yours instead of his
I had moved on...
Not sure how locking/closing a potential contributor's useful PR to a repo that's not even yours but for the public good makes this a good thing...? Please elaborate
...but then #273 (comment) came with an accusation and insult.
The comment you link is:
@Robson how come you closed the PR did I upset you? If so that wasn't the intention I was being honest in addressing your strange points
Why do you find it an insult for someone to suggest you were upset after you not only closed, but locked a PR instead of respond like a compassionate human? Also what's it matter if you got upset, did you know showing human emotion is actually desirable trait in society?
I have no interest in dealing with anyone with the displayed behaviours.
So you are saying, you not only closed,, but locked this and the subsequent epic chatgpt.js README PRs because I am the author, correct? In other words, anyone else who created the PRs would not get the same treatment, because they didn't accuse you of being upset. (Correct me if I'm wrong, this is my understanding of your strange behavior)
I won't merge in any PR from someone like that because they are a liability.
Liable for, what I am so lost right now
So the most efficient path is to just close that person's PRs for the safety of our users.
I am an unsafe danger to people who read this repo's README??? 😦 Do explain the logic behind this statement (of which you are making increasingly bizarre ones)
I had thought that would lead to the person moving on, but instead it led to even more replies from them and now this Issue from them.
I don't know why you keep mentioning "move on" but are you suggesting I need your permission to open PRs or report abusive behavior via Issue to the repo owner
All other PR submitters have been great to work with, so this is new territory for me.
I am only speaking of my experience. To repeat, you not only closed, but locked not one but two PRs abruptly after I tagged the repo owner to have a look at your strange reasoning for suggesting a contribution is somehow unworthy for being monorepo style.
I'm confident others probably don't do this, so you're confirming my point you got upset by me alone, but it is not against any rule nor actually an "insult" to respectably disagree, then tag the repo's owner (nor should you expect me to "go away" or get further upset if I continue to respond to notifications you send me)
Also I know you blocked me because you don't show up in auto-tag list, so IDK why you deny you got upset (not upset ppl don't block users).
But the main point is Matias assigned you this role to further his repo, it shouldn't matter if you got upset or not, the repo is for the public (and his followers the more it grows) not for you to abuse power against those you perceive to have wronged you.
Also it is very crazy to suggest someone is somehow an "unsafe" danger for suggesting your strange behavior was due to you got upset I tagged Mattias
I believe in the mission here and it's rewarding to have people submit compatible readmes and then get them merged in.
But monorepo readmes are compatible w/ monorepos.... (also if it's truly rewarding, you would not close/lock instead of leave open someone's PR for others to comment on who you revealed you thought insulted you for simply suggesting you got upset, which is actually what an upset person would do, act petty instead of for greater good)
It's a win for everyone.
What did I win I don't get it
I'll often submit a PR to them with little improvements for their readme, to help them make it even more awesome, because that helps everyone as well.
Did you want to submit a PR to any of my READMEs? I assure you I won't get upset and merge virtually all PRs btw (otherwise I don't know why you're telling me this, as a reminder you locked my PRs)
That's all I have to say, so I won't post any further responses unless they are to someone else.
This issue was for Matias to handle though, don't feel obliged to respond to little old me
I will leave this open for a week in case Matias wants to make a decision/comment.
But why are you suggesting you will close an issue directed at Matias over your own abusive behavior. Why not just leave it alone if you didn't do anything wrong?
I don't want to leave unresolved PRs in the repository forever, so I will apply this week-rule to #277 as well. Matias can always reopen these things if he wants to.
So what's wrong with leaving it open for Matias to handle? Did you know, if you end up closing it as you make it sound, you're actually strengthening my point? That you are acting petty out of vengeance when by your own admission all I said was:
@Robson how come you closed the PR did I upset you? If so that wasn't the intention I was being honest in addressing your strange points
...and you explicitly stated this innocuous comment is somehow an insult is the reason you are making your strange actions, but someone like Matias could instantly reassure you there is no "unsafe" threat you are labeling me to be, but if you close it makes it less visible for him so you appear even more petty thus strengthening my point even more btw
I don't want to leave unresolved PRs in the repository forever, so I will apply this week-rule to #277 as well. Matias can always reopen these things if he wants to.
But there is nothing wrong with that awesome README others would benefit from if merged, do you realize the more you express these intentions to close valid/useful PRs the more you're proving my point you're acting very petty. Can you please just let him close it? Your world won't end, and you get to come off as less petty for abusing your power over me like this... please?
I will leave this open for a week in case Matias wants to make a decision/comment.
@Robson why are you even announcing you'll be closing an unresolved issue that is someone else's responsibility to investigate your disruptive behavior?
Please do not meddle, I repeat, this is for @matiassingers, not you
If you close it unresolved, you're actually exhibiting even more signs of pettiness... (and I will re-open anyway, not sure what you think you accomplish trying to cover your tracks like that)
@adamlui, just to be 100% clear, this is a volunteer project that @Robson is kindly helping maintain for no benefit or compensation. While I understand your frustration, your tone toward @Robson, despite their detailed responses, is unacceptable and out of line.
If you disagree with their curation decisions (or, by proxy, mine), please feel free to fork the repo and curate your own collection. I’m really grateful for @Robson’s high-quality and fair curation of this collection.
I'll be closing this issue now.
@matiassingers I understand he works for you free, also I don't disagree he gave a detailed response, however what I don't believe you understand is the timeline that warrants my now tone:
- I open PR
- He said the monorepo style README serves no value, then stated "if we were to merge" then stated strike out "striking" from header
- At this point, he is suggesting PR is still open to merge, so I obey and respond to address his concerns (in the neutral tone, not the now tone)
- right after my neutral response, I said "sorry, I meant @matiassingers repo not yours"
- he immediately closes PR, no response!
Do you understand, there was no now tone back when he overreacted? So my tone is in reaction to his bizarre reaction? Why even suggest he wants a PR to be merged only to shut down when the contributor addresses all his points (neutrally)?
Again, I do not disagree he works for you free or he gave a detailed response. I implore you to understand this timeline, from the POV of a contributor. After his bizarre and sudden closing of PR, I even asked if he got upset (which I suspected and confirmed since he blocked me) and even apologized for doing nothing wrong!
He even cited this apology as somehow an "insult" as the reason he began closing valid PRs. So please don't accuse me of being "out of line" when nothing about my tone escalated until after he abused his power over me.