Unactionable label must not be used on valid issues

[falsandtru]

cc @ahejlsberg

Unactionable label has no info to create actionable issues. Therefore you must not use that label on valid issues.

@RyanCavanaugh threatens me at #39809 to hide his faults scream

This reopens #39809. #39809 is speedily closed and locked to hide @RyanCavanaugh's faults.

@RyanCavanaugh remove Unactionable label of #39798. His Unactionable label is wrong as I expected. But some issues having inappropriate Unactionable label still exist. @RyanCavanaugh must remove Unactionable label from the all of them.

FYI, #39809 is not duplicate because the original issue is closed with doing nothing. And @RyanCavanaugh rejected the subject of that issue.

At #39810 @RyanCavanaugh said humans make mistakes. But he said it only himself. He forgave himself without apologizing to me. What an evil act. Who forgive him? It is not himself.

[DanielRosenwasser]

@falsandtru I think maybe we need to set expectations here. We get lots of issues every day with finite time and resources to address all of them. Figuring out a way to prioritize and understand and categorize them is difficult. The more work a user puts into an issue to explain the use-cases and goals, the easier it is for us to correctly categorize the issues. I'll be very frank: your issues tend to be very esoteric and sparse on details and motivations. While we've seen that many of them provide minimal repros, it is still hard to diagnose and appropriately categorize them.

Note that even when we do correctly categorize them, we still won't always be able to provide what you might consider an optimal response. Many issues appear very uncommon and we won't be able to prioritize them (either in that we recognize the issue but won't be issuing a near-term fix, or that we don't believe that the language has to permit all code given the cost:benefit ratio).

Now when it comes to these recent meta-issues you've filed about applying labels, this simply isn't productive. You are exacerbating the original problem and making it more difficult to have a civil conversation. I'll quote from our code of conduct:

Be friendly and patient

Understand disagreements

@RyanCavanaugh already cited this (#39810 (comment)), but I'll ask you to please take a step back and reconsider ways for your communication style to meet the Code of Conduct guidelines. Posting issues like this isn't an acceptable way to participate, and if it continues we'll consider it spam.

[falsandtru]

Now when it comes to these recent meta-issues you've filed about applying labels, this simply isn't productive. You are exacerbating the original problem and making it more difficult to have a civil conversation. I'll quote from our code of conduct

You are avoiding to touch the evil actions of @RyanCavanaugh. Since you are not respecting your code of conduct, you have no right to demand the code of conduct. You must apologize me about your faults before demanding the code of conduct.

[DanielRosenwasser]

We'll consider whether there's a better strategy to triage and communicate on the repo, but these are pretty strong and clear mischaracterizations. We're not going to make Code of Conduct enforcement here conditional. That means any more antagonism or issue spam from you may result in a ban.

[falsandtru]

We're not going to make Code of Conduct enforcement here conditional. That means any more antagonism or issue spam from you may result in a ban.

You mean all the actions of @RyanCavanaugh are appropriate. I bring an accusation against that actions. And @RyanCavanaugh uses Unactionable label as a tool of his inappropriate actions. It is obvious from the reactions to #39798 and #39807. @RyanCavanaugh's reactions are obviously inappropriate. If you don't verify his correctness, you are verifying only contributors. It means you never go wrong. You are demanding such an unfair condition. Don't demand such a shameless condition.

[RyanCavanaugh]

We're not asking you to accept us as infallible. We make mistakes, we try to correct them when we can, and we try to work with you and many other people on this repo. We expect others to make mistakes too, and will try to resolve them as best we can. Many people bring repros that don't represent bugs, don't explain their reasoning, or don't have enough information to proceed - that is our definition of unactionable, and we're going to continue using it where appropriate. No apology is warranted or offered for this. You've logged hundreds of issues here and seen hundreds of them fixed or implemented, so you understand that we have a process for sorting things out that is not arbitrary or capricious.

The only thing we're asking you to do is not log new issues, especially duplicative issues, when you don't agree with our determination of whether or not an issue is something that we're able to work with. That isn't what the issue tracker is for, and your insistence on doing so is an abuse of it.

I've always looked forward to reading your issues and hope that you can come to an understanding wherein we can allow that to continue.