> The users@ list is about individuals and students are on the list as > individuals, not as class participants. I fear discussion with the teachers > could lead to serious problems - it would only take one large class, or even > not so large class, pointed at users@ to take things to a whole different > level.
This is surely true. My suggestion was meant to open up the possibility of some avenue of communication _outside_ users@ if that was deemed appropriate after discussion. For example, I could imagine a teacher inviting a Jena committer or expert user to join a class discussion list to help out. (With, of course, the possibility of forwarding questions to users@ as needed.) Generally, my hope would be not to throttle or spam the current venues for support but to open up new ones. --- A. Soroka The University of Virginia Library > On Oct 24, 2016, at 11:49 AM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote: > > From general reference > Apache has a code of conduct: > https://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct > > > > Just a couple of points to add to the discussion: > > It would be a problem if we believe it is off putting for other people. I > don't think we are at that point but it is something to keep in mind. > > On teachers: > > The users@ list is about individuals and students are on the list as > individuals, not as class participants. I fear discussion with the teachers > could lead to serious problems - it would only take one large class, or even > not so large class, pointed at users@ to take things to a whole different > level. > > At that point, it could become off putting for other people. > > > Some principles I use: > > 1/ There is no obligation to answer - we do it because we're being helpful. > > 2/ We do not do assignments - we can help with understanding semweb and using > Jena. > > 3/ Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example - or at least some attempt to > get to one. "It does not work" is not a MCVE. > > 4/ People need to make an effort, such as respond to requests for better > examples, to attempt to apply suggestions. > > Replying with "does not work" 10 minutes after a reply does not show effort. > > > Andy > > > On 24/10/16 15:52, A. Soroka wrote: >>> I take the first bullet to mean some "enforcement" is proposed and the last >>> bullet to suggest that a "ban" is "possible". >> >> Sorry, I missed that last phrase-- I wouldn't support a ban for that kind of >> reason. I take "enforcement" simply to mean that after the same question is >> asked several times with good answers ignored, the question can legitimately >> be ignored. I don't see anything wrong with that. >> >>> I was not pointing out that projects go through phases. >>> I was pointing out that Jena has been in mature use, including by students >>> on course projects, for many years. We get phases where we get naive and >>> poorly asked questions from students. Those phases are more related to >>> course lifecycles than to Jena lifecycles. >> >> I'm sorry I misunderstood you. >> >>> Patient responses, as have been given here, generally work. If they don't >>> then continued such poor questions can simply go unanswered. I really don't >>> think there's enough volume of such traffic here as to be a problem. >>> >>> Dave >> >> I don't think disagreeing on how problematic the kind of traffic about which >> we are writing is should stop us from trying new kinds of engagement. In >> other words, creating more resources for beginners is good for Jena no >> matter whether you think this mailing list question is serious or not. >> >> --- >> A. Soroka >> The University of Virginia Library >>
