Re: [CODE4LIB] Listserv communication, was RE: Proposed Duty Officer

2016-02-26 Thread Kyle Banerjee
> You're also always going to have trouble with getting people to ask > questions, unless the concept of asking for help/guidance has been drilled > into them as not stupid, but constructive, for a very long time. I'm > talking life span. > Responses people expect are also a barrier to

Re: [CODE4LIB] Listserv communication

2016-02-26 Thread Julie Swierczek
I just volunteered as a candidate for duty officer, but I had to include one caveat about a bullet point in the duty officer description: I can't IRC well. At all. I would be afraid to monitor IRC and be available to answer questions there because I would be afraid of sending a private

Re: [CODE4LIB] Listserv communication, was RE: Proposed Duty Officer

2016-02-26 Thread BWS Johnson
My fellow nerds, I'm snipping *a lot* but in brief I definitely agree with Julie. > Kyle’s main issue was really a question about what to do with > private and anonymous feedback – not that we should avoid it, but rather we > should discuss how that should be handled. For example,

Re: [CODE4LIB] Listserv communication

2016-02-26 Thread Michael Schofield
Woohoo! -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Esmé Cowles Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 10:27 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Listserv communication In fact, there is a C4L slack channel: https

Re: [CODE4LIB] Listserv communication

2016-02-26 Thread Esmé Cowles
uary 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 listserv

Re: [CODE4LIB] Listserv communication, was RE: Proposed Duty Officer

2016-02-26 Thread Timothy Tavarez
Some notes on participation/inclusion: 1) It can be difficult integrating yourself into a group where you may feel like more or less of an outsider. An on-boarding experience of some sort - even so simple as a web page for new users might help. The code4lib website has little pieces of advice

Re: [CODE4LIB] Listserv communication

2016-02-26 Thread Francis Kayiwa
On 2/26/16 10:23 AM, Michael Schofield 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? https://code4lib.slack.com Cheers, ./fxk -- Finagle's

Re: [CODE4LIB] Listserv communication

2016-02-26 Thread Michael Schofield
, 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

Re: [CODE4LIB] Listserv communication

2016-02-26 Thread Ethan Gruber
Nearly all of my professional communication occurs on Twitter, for better or worse. I think that is probably the case for many of us. Code4lib is very much alive, but perhaps has evolved into disparate conversations taking place on Twitter instead of the listserv. On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:07

Re: [CODE4LIB] Listserv communication

2016-02-26 Thread Shaun D. Ellis
On Feb 26, 2016, at 8:42 AM, Julie Swierczek > 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

[CODE4LIB] Listserv communication, was RE: Proposed Duty Officer

2016-02-26 Thread Julie Swierczek
I just want to respond to let people know that Kyle and I have been discussing this further through private channels, and we agree on many points. My earlier response was not meant to be a criticism of what Kyle said specifically; rather, I was responding to what I see are the larger