Hi Martin,
Le 2019-12-10 à 21:55, Martin Klapetek a écrit :
On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 8:01 PM Philippe Cloutier <chea...@gmail.com
<mailto:chea...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Le 2019-12-05 à 10:45, Nate Graham a écrit :
>
>
> On 12/5/19 8:01 AM, Dominik Haumann wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 1:24 PM Eike Hein <h...@kde.org
<mailto:h...@kde.org>> wrote:
>>> But they don't, so your calculation is about solving a problem
that
>>> doesn't currently exist.
>>
>> +1
>>
>
> +2, let's propose fixing the problem when there actually is a
problem,
> not when we suspect that there might at some future point be a
problem
> if people don't behave well.
I'm afraid the problem is already there. The problem starts from the
moment a member posts an unrelated post, when someone who is not
interested in it starts reading.
But how is that problem of the Planet?
Who claimed it was?
If the reader decides to
read something, then the reader can't blame the medium for giving
them the opportunity to read that. It's always up to readers to decide
whether they want to read something or not. The choice is theirs already.
It may be easier for you to recognize it as a Planet problem to think
about the opposite effect: people not reading Planet because they choose
to invest their time elsewhere.
By the way, I was once a Planet KDE reader, though if I remember
correctly, I stopped reading when I stopped using Akregator, not because
I found the signal-to-noise ratio insufficient.
But denying the problem or blaming it on others won't help. Making the
existing compromise discoverable is constructive. We can go further
identifying and implementing actual solutions.
[...]
Cheers
--
Martin Klapetek
--
Philippe Cloutier
http://www.philippecloutier.com
