In fact, there is a C4L slack channel: https://code4lib.slack.com
Sign up here: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/120Dw1JjLxPJB9VTGl0mUY7Ot6yg6YNY1RZUISJFzdwk/viewform?c=0&w=1 -Esmé > On Feb 26, 2016, at 10:23 AM, Michael Schofield <mschofi...@nova.edu> wrote: > > Not thinking very critically about this, but: > > I was surprised seeing that the C4L conference was looking for an IRC > communicator that, well, IRC. Why isn't there a Code4Lib Slack channel? The > Library User Experience slack-- ahem ahem https://libux.herokuapp.com -- has > like 200 people in it, and as more and more organizations jump on the > Slackwagon it is easy to sit in multiple rooms, use on your phone, etc. Even > for use during the conference, during WordCamp Miami there were 350 people > sitting in our slack channel, preferring that to the use of twitter as the > backchannel. > > Best, > > Michael Schofield (@schoeyfield) > > www.libux.co > www.webforlibraries.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Shaun > D. Ellis > Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 10:07 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Listserv communication > > > On Feb 26, 2016, at 8:42 AM, Julie Swierczek > <julie_swierc...@harvard.edu<mailto:julie_swierc...@harvard.edu>> wrote: > > We also agreed that listservs – both here and elsewhere – seem to have > shrinking participation over time, and there does seem to be a drive to pull > more conversations out of the public eye. There is no question that some > matters are best discussed in private channels, such as feedback about > individual candidates for duty officers, or matters pertaining to physical > and mental well-being. But when it comes to discussing technology or other > professional matters, there seems to be a larger trend of more responses > going off listservs. (I, for one, generally do not reply to questions on > listservs and instead reply to the OP privately because I’ve been burned to > many times publicly. The main listserv for archivists in the US has such a > bad reputation for flaming that it has its own hashtag: #thatdarnlist.) > > Maybe we can brainstorm about common reasons for people not using the list: > impostor syndrome (I don’t belong here and/or I certainly don’t have the > right ‘authority’ to respond to this); fear of being judged - we see others > being judged on a list (about the technological finesse of their response, > for instance) so we don’t want to put ourselves in a position where we will > be judged; fear of talking in general because we have seen other people > harmed for bringing their ideas to public forums (cf. doxing and swatting); > fear of looking stupid in general. > > Thank you for bringing this up, Julie. I have been curious about this > myself. I think you are correct in that there is some “impostor syndrome > involved, but my hypothesis is that there has been a lot of splintering of > the channels/lists over the past several years that has dried up some of the > conversation. For one, there’s StackOverflow. StackOverflow is more > effective than a listserv on general tech questions because it requires you > to ask questions in a way that is clear (with simple examples) and keeps > answers on topic. There has also been a move towards specific project lists > so that more general lists like Code4Lib are not bombarded with discussions > about project-related minutia that are only relevant to a certain > sub-community. > > I don’t see this as a bad thing, as it allows Code4Lib to be a gathering hub > among many different sub-groups. But it can make it difficult to know what > is appropriate to post and ask here. Code4Lib has always been about > inspiration and curiosity to me. This is a place to be a free thinker, to > question, to dissent, to wonder. We have a long tradition of “asking > anything” and we shouldn’t discourage that, but I think Code4Lib is a > particularly good space to discuss bigger-picture tech-in-library > issues/challenges as well as general best practices at a “techy” level. It’s > certainly the appropriate space to inspire others with amazing examples of > library tech that delights users. :) > > I have to admit that I was disappointed that the recent question about > full-text searching basics (behind OregonDigital’s in-page highlighting of > keywords in the IA Bookreader) went basically unanswered. This was a > well-articulated legitimate question, and at least a few people on this list > should be able to answer it. It’s actually on my list to try to do it so that > I can report back, but maybe someone could save me the trouble and quench our > curiosity? > > Cheers, > Shaun
