Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 at 22:02, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/20/2020 2:55 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > I don't think we need continuity/historicity on every card transfer, and > > the only reason for some of the other reports to have timestamped > > documents (e.g. Treasuror) is to have self-ratified rollback points. > > What do people think about a type of self-ratification that ratifies a > particular git commit as being the authoritative version? That's > cloneable if any single platform flakes on us. What's the advantage over just including the text to be ratified in the message? Also, we could probably already do this under the current rules. Just ratify the document at path X at git commit Y (and include a link where it can be found at the time the message is sent). - Falsifian
Re: [Poll] A chat client for Agora (was Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that)
For someone whose daily driver is a 2008 laptop from a now-defunct company, bridges are great for me since IRC clients are generally lower-power than Discord's web interface. -- Trigon currently on a phone On Sun, Jun 21, 2020, 14:16 nch via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/21/20 3:00 PM, omd via agora-discussion wrote: > > So we could set up a Discord community and then bridge it with IRC. > > This can sometimes have awkward results [1], but from what I've heard > > it basically works. > > I've been on discords that have IRC/Discord bridges, and they seem > perfectly serviceable. I don't see any downside either. > > -- > nch > Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager > > >
Re: [Poll] A chat client for Agora (was Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that)
On 6/21/20 3:00 PM, omd via agora-discussion wrote: > So we could set up a Discord community and then bridge it with IRC. > This can sometimes have awkward results [1], but from what I've heard > it basically works. I've been on discords that have IRC/Discord bridges, and they seem perfectly serviceable. I don't see any downside either. -- nch Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
Re: [Poll] A chat client for Agora (was Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that)
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:24 PM Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote: > So here comes the poll part: what does everyone think about a chat client? > IRC or Discord? Something open like Matrix? There are lots of options here. > What's the call? In addition to Matrix, open source options include Mattermost, Rocket.Chat, and Zulip. I'm willing to host any of those if desired, although that would probably not be necessary for Matrix since it has existing free public servers. As far as I know, those alternatives are largely on par with Discord in terms of pure functionality. But that's only part of the story. If you're on Discord, you can see all your Discord "servers" (i.e. communities; they're not actually independently hosted) in one integrated interface. That makes it easy and convenient to add another server; personally, I'm on dozens of servers, even though I rarely even use Discord! In contrast, using another chat site, even if it looks like Discord, requires you to actively keep that site open in your browser. In other words, Discord has a strong proprietary lock-in. I'm pretty annoyed by it, but I don't much blame Discord itself. I blame the world for not coming up with better third-party chat clients, ones capable of integrating multiple independent chat services into one interface. There are many IRC clients; there were many AIM/Yahoo/MSN clients back in the day; where are the "Slack-alike" clients? There are ways to connect IRC clients to these services, but they tend to lose functionality (e.g. edits and formatting). You'd think it would be possible to connect Matrix clients to them, but I haven't seen a gateway that works well for personal use. On the other hand, more on-topic, there *is* a relatively robust ecosystem of tools to publicly bridge channels on different services, where a bot connects to each channel and relays all messages from the other channel. For example, there's matterbridge, which, despite its name referring to Mattermost, is a: > bridge between mattermost, IRC, gitter, xmpp, slack, discord, > telegram, rocketchat, steam, twitch, ssh-chat, zulip, whatsapp, > keybase, matrix, microsoft teams and more with REST API (mattermost > not required!) So we could set up a Discord community and then bridge it with IRC. This can sometimes have awkward results [1], but from what I've heard it basically works. [1] https://drewdevault.com/2019/07/01/Absence-of-features-in-IRC.html (I disagree with the overall thesis, but it shows the problem with bridges)
Re: Archival Continuity and Discussion Accessibility (was Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that)
On 6/20/2020 3:01 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/20/20 4:55 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: >> On 6/20/2020 2:46 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >>> To be clear, I'd never suggest moving gameplay to a chat client. Discord >>> did not exist 27 years ago, and it's not that likely to exist in 27 >>> years. Agora needs something with the continuity of email. This would >>> only be discussion in the same way the IRC is/was (does anyone still use >>> it?). >> I think the following things should stay document-based (e.g. keyed to >> timestamped "historical" documents): >> >> - Promotor results, Assessor Results, CFJ results, Herald's Scroll. >> - maybe ADoP. >> >> I don't think we need continuity/historicity on every card transfer, and >> the only reason for some of the other reports to have timestamped >> documents (e.g. Treasuror) is to have self-ratified rollback points. >> >> -G. >> > Would we expect CFJs to then include every reference in their text > rather than links? What about particularly complex and notable action > sequences? Scams tend to involve doing a lot of actions that are > inconsequential individually. Also: Text of contracts, pledges, > promises... The line between simple forgettable gameplay actions and > notable reportable events can be pretty blurry sometimes. > Thinking about it, the main things to "not change" are just the proposals, CFJs and rulesets, that have a common-enough format going back at least to 2003 that you can write a script to scrape the archives and parse them. I think for any subgames/contracts, we're better served starting a tradition of "when this is repealed, the officer declares a git repo for the game "historical" and it remains for posterity. Each subgame will be different in the sort of things worth archiving. One of my main research documents is the old Ruleset history in Zefram's archives, so (again, as long as we keep at least a couple clones current) I think we can do a lot with web archives. -G.
[Poll] A chat client for Agora (was Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that)
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 16:09 nch via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/20/20 5:07 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: > > Alternatively, we do have an IRC chat which is already an official > > forum. Mayhaps if the Webmastor promoted this service, it could > > encourage us to congregate there to answer new players' questions. > > > > -- > > Trigon > > > > (I haven't figured out my signature on mobile yet.) > > I'm pretty against the IRC tbh. It's less accessible than Discord and if > you're not connected constantly you don't get to see previous messages. > Obviously there's ways around this, but in the modern internet they're > pretty arcane. I use discord daily across multiple devices for great > success. If I was going to advocate for a chat client, it'd be that. > Some part of me despises that so many of my social groups have decided to congregate on a completely proprietary chat system that offers so little customization. At the same time, I do concede that Discord is likely the most accessible chat client out there and that real-time, accessible chat client is a very good way to help people learn the ropes. So here comes the poll part: what does everyone think about a chat client? IRC or Discord? Something open like Matrix? There are lots of options here. What's the call? -- Trigon (still working on the signature, please hold.) >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that
On 6/20/20 5:07 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: > Alternatively, we do have an IRC chat which is already an official > forum. Mayhaps if the Webmastor promoted this service, it could > encourage us to congregate there to answer new players' questions. > > -- > Trigon > > (I haven't figured out my signature on mobile yet.) I'm pretty against the IRC tbh. It's less accessible than Discord and if you're not connected constantly you don't get to see previous messages. Obviously there's ways around this, but in the modern internet they're pretty arcane. I use discord daily across multiple devices for great success. If I was going to advocate for a chat client, it'd be that. -- nch Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 15:33 nch via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/20/20 4:10 PM, Stefan Fjellander via agora-discussion wrote: > > (I rejoined discussions) > >> Sorry to see you going, but always happy to have you back if you choose. > >> Can I ask what you found most difficult/frustrating? > >> Difficult > > I must admit I don't really know how to vote, nor how CFJs work, and the > > discussion in general was over my head 90% of the time. I could probably > > have caught up in a few months? But that leads to my next point: > >> Frustrating > > So Many Emails So Little Time So Little Knowledge. Getting 20 to 50 > emails > > overnight, of which I understood very few, is a hassle to read, so I got > in > > the habit of just instantly deleting them without reading, which doesn't > > help me learn more nor makes me interact. (Email lists in general aren't > > really a thing I do well? I might have survived longer on say a Discord > > group or something, where there's lower barriers to asking stupider > > questions, but that has other downsides, and is just me having my > personal > > issues.) > > Speaking of which, I've been thinking of suggesting a Discord. I know > the downside to chat systems is that things aren't recorded in a way > that can be referenced long term, but it would certainly help people > overcome barriers like this one and in general ask quick clarifying > questions. > Alternatively, we do have an IRC chat which is already an official forum. Mayhaps if the Webmastor promoted this service, it could encourage us to congregate there to answer new players' questions. -- Trigon (I haven't figured out my signature on mobile yet.)
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that
On 6/20/2020 2:55 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > I don't think we need continuity/historicity on every card transfer, and > the only reason for some of the other reports to have timestamped > documents (e.g. Treasuror) is to have self-ratified rollback points. What do people think about a type of self-ratification that ratifies a particular git commit as being the authoritative version? That's cloneable if any single platform flakes on us.
Archival Continuity and Discussion Accessibility (was Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that)
On 6/20/20 4:55 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 6/20/2020 2:46 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >> To be clear, I'd never suggest moving gameplay to a chat client. Discord >> did not exist 27 years ago, and it's not that likely to exist in 27 >> years. Agora needs something with the continuity of email. This would >> only be discussion in the same way the IRC is/was (does anyone still use >> it?). > I think the following things should stay document-based (e.g. keyed to > timestamped "historical" documents): > > - Promotor results, Assessor Results, CFJ results, Herald's Scroll. > - maybe ADoP. > > I don't think we need continuity/historicity on every card transfer, and > the only reason for some of the other reports to have timestamped > documents (e.g. Treasuror) is to have self-ratified rollback points. > > -G. > Would we expect CFJs to then include every reference in their text rather than links? What about particularly complex and notable action sequences? Scams tend to involve doing a lot of actions that are inconsequential individually. Also: Text of contracts, pledges, promises... The line between simple forgettable gameplay actions and notable reportable events can be pretty blurry sometimes. -- nch Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that
On 6/20/2020 2:42 PM, Stefan Fjellander via agora-discussion wrote: >> I know the downside to chat systems is that things aren't recorded in a > way > that can be referenced long term, > I happen to run an somewhat nomiclike conlang discord server, where we have > a few channels corresponding to agora discussion, which are just as any > else, and then in the channels corresponding to agora business you have to > format messages a certain way and then, once the bill [we're not dealing > with non-bill things] passes or fails it is automatically archived in a > "showcase" channel. (Things corresponding to agora official just go in a > channel where only our equivalent of office holders can send messages, but > where all can read.) > > I know changing fora can be hard (see https://xkcd.com/1782/), and that > discord is a specific company as opposed to the email concept which is (if > i'm not too wrong) very openaccess, which both are downsides tho, so i > think a thing of this calibre should be carefully discussed and thought > through by all active members. lol on the xkcd, considering we still have an (almost entirely dead) IRC channel. But when it was most active (~10 years ago?) it did keep some of the discussion volume more manageable, there was more "this conversation is just two of us hashing out wording let's take it to IRC". I think our main hesitation at auto-service is that this is a very "linguistic" game and we tend to like (perhaps too much as Aris recently pointed out) seeing how we can twist natural language around to use loopholes. But I think 90% could be exported to something more automatic (perhaps a type of forum that's strictly limited, so you can do basic stuff in a set format, be we don't have to constantly monitor it for Apathy intents or anything). -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that
On 6/20/2020 2:46 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > To be clear, I'd never suggest moving gameplay to a chat client. Discord > did not exist 27 years ago, and it's not that likely to exist in 27 > years. Agora needs something with the continuity of email. This would > only be discussion in the same way the IRC is/was (does anyone still use > it?). I think the following things should stay document-based (e.g. keyed to timestamped "historical" documents): - Promotor results, Assessor Results, CFJ results, Herald's Scroll. - maybe ADoP. I don't think we need continuity/historicity on every card transfer, and the only reason for some of the other reports to have timestamped documents (e.g. Treasuror) is to have self-ratified rollback points. -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that
On 6/20/20 4:42 PM, Stefan Fjellander wrote: > I happen to run an somewhat nomiclike conlang discord server, where we > have a few channels corresponding to agora discussion, which are just > as any else, and then in the channels corresponding to agora business > you have to format messages a certain way and then, once the bill > [we're not dealing with non-bill things] passes or fails it is > automatically archived in a "showcase" channel. (Things corresponding > to agora official just go in a channel where only our equivalent of > office holders can send messages, but where all can read.) > > I know changing fora can be hard (see https://xkcd.com/1782/), and > that discord is a specific company as opposed to the email concept > which is (if i'm not too wrong) very openaccess, which both are > downsides tho, so i think a thing of this calibre should be carefully > discussed and thought through by all active members. > > Bögtil To be clear, I'd never suggest moving gameplay to a chat client. Discord did not exist 27 years ago, and it's not that likely to exist in 27 years. Agora needs something with the continuity of email. This would only be discussion in the same way the IRC is/was (does anyone still use it?). -- nch Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that
> I know the downside to chat systems is that things aren't recorded in a way that can be referenced long term, I happen to run an somewhat nomiclike conlang discord server, where we have a few channels corresponding to agora discussion, which are just as any else, and then in the channels corresponding to agora business you have to format messages a certain way and then, once the bill [we're not dealing with non-bill things] passes or fails it is automatically archived in a "showcase" channel. (Things corresponding to agora official just go in a channel where only our equivalent of office holders can send messages, but where all can read.) I know changing fora can be hard (see https://xkcd.com/1782/), and that discord is a specific company as opposed to the email concept which is (if i'm not too wrong) very openaccess, which both are downsides tho, so i think a thing of this calibre should be carefully discussed and thought through by all active members. Bögtil Den lör 20 juni 2020 kl 23:33 skrev nch via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org>: > On 6/20/20 4:10 PM, Stefan Fjellander via agora-discussion wrote: > > (I rejoined discussions) > >> Sorry to see you going, but always happy to have you back if you choose. > >> Can I ask what you found most difficult/frustrating? > >> Difficult > > I must admit I don't really know how to vote, nor how CFJs work, and the > > discussion in general was over my head 90% of the time. I could probably > > have caught up in a few months? But that leads to my next point: > >> Frustrating > > So Many Emails So Little Time So Little Knowledge. Getting 20 to 50 > emails > > overnight, of which I understood very few, is a hassle to read, so I got > in > > the habit of just instantly deleting them without reading, which doesn't > > help me learn more nor makes me interact. (Email lists in general aren't > > really a thing I do well? I might have survived longer on say a Discord > > group or something, where there's lower barriers to asking stupider > > questions, but that has other downsides, and is just me having my > personal > > issues.) > > Speaking of which, I've been thinking of suggesting a Discord. I know > the downside to chat systems is that things aren't recorded in a way > that can be referenced long term, but it would certainly help people > overcome barriers like this one and in general ask quick clarifying > questions. > > > > > Thus, I was in the position of "I get 20-50 emails overnight, of which I > > instantly delete 99%, from a community which I almost never interact with > > and which I don't even understand the basics of", and it's unfair both to > > my time and to y'all who are legit invested in this to keep on doing > that. > > > > -- > > Bögtil > > As G. mentioned, there's a good portion of emails I don't read. I read > everything in a-o and a-b, but when it comes to a-d I often skim once > I've gotten the gist of the conversation. If it is important it'll pop > up in a-b and I'll go back and read the thread. Of course, skimming is > easier with more experience so I don't know how helpful this really is > as starter advice. > > -- > nch > Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager > > >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that
On 6/20/20 4:10 PM, Stefan Fjellander via agora-discussion wrote: > (I rejoined discussions) >> Sorry to see you going, but always happy to have you back if you choose. >> Can I ask what you found most difficult/frustrating? >> Difficult > I must admit I don't really know how to vote, nor how CFJs work, and the > discussion in general was over my head 90% of the time. I could probably > have caught up in a few months? But that leads to my next point: >> Frustrating > So Many Emails So Little Time So Little Knowledge. Getting 20 to 50 emails > overnight, of which I understood very few, is a hassle to read, so I got in > the habit of just instantly deleting them without reading, which doesn't > help me learn more nor makes me interact. (Email lists in general aren't > really a thing I do well? I might have survived longer on say a Discord > group or something, where there's lower barriers to asking stupider > questions, but that has other downsides, and is just me having my personal > issues.) Speaking of which, I've been thinking of suggesting a Discord. I know the downside to chat systems is that things aren't recorded in a way that can be referenced long term, but it would certainly help people overcome barriers like this one and in general ask quick clarifying questions. > > Thus, I was in the position of "I get 20-50 emails overnight, of which I > instantly delete 99%, from a community which I almost never interact with > and which I don't even understand the basics of", and it's unfair both to > my time and to y'all who are legit invested in this to keep on doing that. > > -- > Bögtil As G. mentioned, there's a good portion of emails I don't read. I read everything in a-o and a-b, but when it comes to a-d I often skim once I've gotten the gist of the conversation. If it is important it'll pop up in a-b and I'll go back and read the thread. Of course, skimming is easier with more experience so I don't know how helpful this really is as starter advice. -- nch Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that
On 6/20/2020 2:10 PM, Stefan Fjellander via agora-discussion wrote: > Thus, I was in the position of "I get 20-50 emails overnight, of which I > instantly delete 99%, from a community which I almost never interact with > and which I don't even understand the basics of", and it's unfair both to > my time and to y'all who are legit invested in this to keep on doing that. Yeah, I think one of the hardest things to learn is figuring out what to ignore. I'm not reading like 2/3 of the detailed discussions but even with experience it's hard to filter. And we have a real thread management problem around here. It's not uncommon for the same subject line to devolve into 3 or more entirely separate conversations, sometimes switching between Discussion and Business, and it becomes impossible to find the meat of what's actually going on versus a lot of chatter. Chatter is meant in a good way, this is a very social game, but when one part of the thread is 2 people talking about an arcane technical detail that I'm happy to let them hash out on their own, and another part of the thread is actually playing or something, it's a challenge. -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that
(I rejoined discussions) > Sorry to see you going, but always happy to have you back if you choose. > Can I ask what you found most difficult/frustrating? > Difficult I must admit I don't really know how to vote, nor how CFJs work, and the discussion in general was over my head 90% of the time. I could probably have caught up in a few months? But that leads to my next point: > Frustrating So Many Emails So Little Time So Little Knowledge. Getting 20 to 50 emails overnight, of which I understood very few, is a hassle to read, so I got in the habit of just instantly deleting them without reading, which doesn't help me learn more nor makes me interact. (Email lists in general aren't really a thing I do well? I might have survived longer on say a Discord group or something, where there's lower barriers to asking stupider questions, but that has other downsides, and is just me having my personal issues.) Thus, I was in the position of "I get 20-50 emails overnight, of which I instantly delete 99%, from a community which I almost never interact with and which I don't even understand the basics of", and it's unfair both to my time and to y'all who are legit invested in this to keep on doing that. -- Bögtil
