Re: [gentoo-dev] ML changes
On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 23:54:44 -0400, Daniel Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I do like the gentoo-politics idea that came up a few weeks ago, which was to move politics off gentoo-dev and to another list, but I'd view it from another perspective (and avoid the words 'politics'): make gentoo-dev for development topics only, and have another list for the rest. But, I suspect we'd come back to the same problem on both lists, where some people are too keen to talk and deviate too far away from technical discussion. On IRC, when a conversation wanders offtopic, one of the ops just nudges the participants and says hey, you should move your conversation to #gentoo-foo (or ##foo or whatever). Wouldn't it be easy enough for someone to do that here? It'd be pretty easy to specify what's on- and off-topic for each list, and it would be friendlier than moderation, just like it's friendlier for IRC ops to ask you nicely to switch channels than to simply kick you out. --Thomas Tuttle -- Thomas Tuttle - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ttuttle.net/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: ML changes
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:49:23 +0200, Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
__ __ _
|__ / _ \| \/ |/ ___| |
/ / | | | |\/| | | _| |
/ /| |_| | | | | |_| |_|
/\___/|_| |_|\(_)
Anyone tell me how can I get rid of this junk in my mailbox? Where's the
damned -announce list? Please, stop feeding this kind of debates down
everyone's throat.
Hmm. /me doesn't know any MUA's with a kill thread option off the top
of his head (especially one that would remember the Message-ID's so it
could kill new messages from the same thread) but in mutt you could hit
^D to delete the entire thread, IIRC.
--Thomas Tuttle
--
Thomas Tuttle - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ttuttle.net/
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] ML changes
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:08:38 -0400, William L. Thomson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 15:26 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 10:14:00 -0400 William L. Thomson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What makes a developer only -dev list any different than developers only having a voice on #gentoo-dev? The former is where development discussion is supposed to take place. The latter is a social convenience. For some. Most all of my development communication is primarily done via IRC. Email is rarely used, and from what I have seen else where. This seems to be the main trend IMHO. Granted for big issues discussed over time, the ML is a better resource than IRC. Personally, I prefer quicker mechanisms to slower ones, but some people dislike real-time communications because they can interrupt their work constantly. I think what's important is not the signal-to-noise ratio, per se, but the relevant-to-irrelevant ratio. To me, it makes no difference whether the traffic that I don't care about is spam/trolls or just discussion of another project. So I'd support -dev being for coordination of core development and -project being for other things, so that people can read all of -dev easily and simply pay attention to only what they want to see on -project. But I see no reason to moderate either -- #-dev is moderated because IRC is an easy medium to disrupt. It's a lot harder to wander on to a mailing list and start trolling, and it's easier to block. Just my $0.02, Thomas Tuttle -- Thomas Tuttle - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ttuttle.net/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Smoother moderation scheme? (was: ML changes)
Okay, I thought of a potential modification that might make this a little more friendly. Moderate all non-dev posts by default, but pass their posts after a certain time period if nobody checks the queue, and put a few people in charge of whitelisting positive contributors. If whitelisted posters create problems, move them to another moderated state where their posts are not automatically approved and they do not automatically gain whitelisted status. This way, anyone who has productive things to say can contribute easily, because of the automatic posting. Regular, useful posters will soon be freed from this delay, and will be able to post freely. But anyone who causes noise can be sentenced to permanent moderation (i.e., their posts always have to be approved), and anyone who causes trouble can be blacklisted. Here's a detailed explanation: If a poster is a dev (or an arch tester?), they start in the Whitelisted state, otherwise start in the Lightly Moderated state. In the following parts, spam is a post that, unquestionably, as a matter of solid fact, is completely and *intentionally* off-topic, or a flame/troll/etc... that does not also contain any useful discussion of Gentoo. Note that this does *not* include users who accidentally post to the wrong list, or on-topic but nasty messages. annoying things are things like Me too! posts or threads that wander off-topic. Basically, spam is things that are totally worthless, and annoying things are things that are somewhat on-topic but inappropriate for other reasons. In the Lightly Moderated state: All posts are moderated. If a post is not approved within a certain amount of time, it is automatically posted. If the poster: 1. posts a certain number of good messages, 2. is approved by a dev, or 3. becomes a dev, Then they go to the Whitelisted state. If the poster posts spam: They go to the Blacklisted state. In the Heavily Moderated state: All posts are moderated. Posts do not automatically pass through after a delay. If the poster: 1. posts a certain number of good messages, 2. is approved by a dev, or 3. becomes a dev, Then they go to the Whitelisted state. If the poster posts spam: They go to the Blacklisted state. In the Whitelisted state: All posts are passed through automatically. If the poster posts annoying things: They will go to the Heavily Moderated state. If the poster posts spam: They go to the Blacklisted state. In the Blacklisted state: All posts are dumped, period. The poster might return to the Heavily Moderated state after a delay. Perhaps the delay doubles each time the poster is sent to the Blacklisted state. The only people eligible to moderate are devs in the whitelisted state. Questions? Comments? Thanks, Thomas Tuttle -- Thomas Tuttle - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ttuttle.net/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] ML changes
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 12:37:42 -0700, Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 13:53 -0500, Chris Scullard wrote: Chris Thanks for a level-headed response, Chris. I think the biggest source of confusion is that few people went to actually read the Council stuff from last meeting. Some points of contention that nobody seems to be getting: - Nobody is planning on banning users - Unmoderated mails will be auto-accepted after some timeout - Whatever delay is decided can be imposed on developers, too, if they give reason for it to be enforced on them (read, repeat offenders) - This includes myself and the other Council members - All developers will be able to moderate and all moderation is logged - Developers/users will be able to appeal unfair moderation to devrel, so action can be taken against people who moderate badly That pretty much covers most of the assumptions people are making. Yeah, it covers almost everything I just suggested, except one thing. Users who consistently contribute well, or are arch testers or other relevant official contributors, should be able to skip the delay, provided they continue to contribute positively. Thanks, Thomas Tuttle -- Thomas Tuttle - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ttuttle.net/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] ML changes
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 22:31:31 +0200, Bryan Østergaard [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On 7/12/07, Mike Doty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We're going to change the -dev mailing list from completely open to where only devs can post, but any dev could moderate a non-dev post. devs who moderate in bad posts will be subject to moderation themselves. in addition the Why? Is it getting too much junk traffic? gentoo-project list will be created to take over what -dev frequently becomes. there is no requirement to be on this new list. Fine, but I don't understand why -dev would then have to be moderated. If -dev is for core Gentoo stuff, and -project is for more specific stuff or offshoots, why should one be moderated and the other not? This will probably remove the need for -core(everything gets leaked out anyway) but that's a path to cross later. How do you figure? If -dev takes on everything from -core, then the only purpose I can see for moderation is to squelch the opinions of non-devs when controversial issues are discussed. I can understand moderation if non-devs are getting in the way (although I don't see any evidence of that), but that would have nothing to do with -core. We're voting on this next council meeting so if you have input, now would be the time. I don't officially have input, but I think this is a bad idea, or should at least be presented along with some reasoning. -dev is the way a lot of people learn about Gentoo development, and it would be unfair to force people including devs-to-be to wait for someone to approve their posts. Consider this my last post ever to gentoo-dev ML if this really goes through. Degrading non-dev contributers like myself to second-class citizens is definitely not going to make me want to contribute anything more. He's got a point. And, as an arch tester, I'm going to be annoyed if one day I need to ask something here and my post is delayed or lost because I'm not a dev. -- Thomas Tuttle - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ttuttle.net/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] ML changes
Oh, a couple more questions. On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 13:24:32 -0700, Mike Doty [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: All- We're going to change the -dev mailing list from completely open to where only devs can post What about arch testers? but any dev could moderate a non-dev post. This is bad, for two reasons. 1. It doesn't put responsibility for moderating messages in a timely fashion on anyone. Devs will want to hack, not moderate, and I worry that messages would get ignored. 2. It doesn't set a clear standard for what is acceptable or not. Some devs might moderate in questions/suggestions from non-devs willingly, while others might decide that they're getting in the way and moderate them out. devs who moderate in bad posts will be subject to moderation themselves. What about devs who moderate *out good* posts? Do you have a way to make sure devs aren't trashing messages that others might find useful? I could see situations where a user or dev-to-be makes a suggestion or comment that is badly written, or not feasible in the dev's mind, or wrong to them in some other way, and the dev trashes it, figuring it's irrelevant to everyone. gentoo-project list will be created to take over what -dev frequently becomes. Is there an official definition of the split between the two? Is -dev basically going to be core Gentoo devs collaborating on internal things that require coordination, and -project going to be where various projects get implemented? This will probably remove the need for -core(everything gets leaked out anyway) but that's a path to cross later. I'd cross it sooner, rather than later, because without moving -core's traffic to -dev, it will look like you're just excluding non-devs for no reason. If -dev becomes a place where devs truly need an uninterrupted place to discuss things, then you could fairly say that the devs need the moderation to work efficiently. Thanks again, Thomas Tuttle -- Thomas Tuttle - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ttuttle.net/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] ML changes
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 22:55:15 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: How will moderation actually work? Whom to ask to moderate a mail? Just mail a random dev, at best one having to do with the issue or the discussion, to his [EMAIL PROTECTED] address and ask to forward the post or how? Most mailing list systems have a built-in provision for moderation. The devs who haven't been meta-moderated out (to use the Slashdot term) would have access to it, and could approve or reject messages from non-devs. I guess. -- Thomas Tuttle - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ttuttle.net/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
