On 8/29/2015 12:27 PM, Niall Douglas wrote:
On 29 Aug 2015 at 12:11, Agustín K-ballo Bergé wrote:
On 8/29/2015 11:48 AM, Niall Douglas wrote:
For the record, I requested that the moderators intervene regarding his behaviour early on in this review as I felt no good was going to come of it. They declined to do so.
This *sounds* deeply concerning. Rather than making assumptions, I would appreciate if you could be a bit more concrete on what you mean by it. If that request took part in email form, perhaps even give us a link to the thread?
I simply forwarded his first two emails with a request that an intervention be made.
Thanks. Are those two emails these: http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2015/08/224776.php http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2015/08/224782.php
When he then submitted what I would consider a fake review which would have to be counted in AFIO's acceptance or rejection, I felt I was left no choice but to act in my defense as otherwise my library could be rejected for inappropriate reasons.
That's not how the Boost review process works. Votes aren't counted, they are weighted by a criteria of choice of the review manager.
(For the record, I can see given the reviews to date why it might be rejected anyway, but that's not the point here. If it came down to say a score of 3 in favour and 3 against and his review tipped the scales to 4 against, that would be a big problem).
Again, that's not how the Boost review process works. Regards, -- Agustín K-ballo Bergé.- http://talesofcpp.fusionfenix.com