> On Feb 2, 2017, at 6:37 PM, Xiaodi Wu <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Ted kremenek via swift-evolution 
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 2, 2017, at 5:35 PM, Karl Wagner via swift-evolution 
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> It's at least worth a beta test.
>> 
>> There are real concerns to work out here — just moving to the forum blindly 
>> would be bad if it is highly disruptive to the community having important 
>> discussions.  I DO think a forum is likely the way to go, but I also am not 
>> dismissive that individuals who are highly active on swift-evolution that 
>> prefer an email workflow will not have their own participation significantly 
>> compromised by just moving to a forum in a cavalier way.
>> 
>> What I have enjoyed seeing from this thread is a healthy discussion about 
>> tradeoffs of both approaches and an identification of concerns of moving 
>> away from the mailing lists.  Some responses to those concerns have been 
>> "Discourse can handle that", which to me is part of the evaluation of the 
>> tradeoffs.  I am also really happy that Nate setup the mock Discourse setup 
>> so we could evaluate thing like the email bridge.  For example, 
>> experimenting of whether or not a rich HTML email works versus plain text 
>> emails for inline responses (which turns out to have problems), etc.   
>> That's all super useful for actually evaluating moving to Discourse, so in 
>> my mind we are actually trying things out and identifying problem points.
>> 
>> The other thing I'm considering is the practical logistics of getting this 
>> set up and maintained (from an infrastructure perspective).  That's not 
>> something that needs to be discussed on this thread — I'd rather the thread 
>> focus on whether a forum is the right thing for the community.  But it is 
>> still something that is being considered in tandem to this discussion, which 
>> obviously needs to be figured out before we just jump to using Discourse (if 
>> that is what we end up doing).
> 
> On the topic of whether a forum is the right thing for the community, I 
> figure I should throw another point into the conversation. Forums are often 
> designed around a rewards system to encourage participation in approved ways, 
> and to encourage it frequently. People who write popular posts get more 
> likes, or stars, or dingbats, and voting is encouraged from the community to 
> surface the most liked/starred/dingbatted. Just earlier in this thread, there 
> were explicit calls for any adopted platform to have liking/unliking features.
> 
> In a mailing list format, everyone is free to start a new thread. Whether you 
> invented the language or started learning it yesterday, if you have a new 
> idea, it comes into everyone's inbox in exactly the same way. No one's user 
> name has extra flares or trophies or whatever reminding you of their status. 
> Yes, it's true that there have been a proliferation of +1's lately. It is 
> also true that not too long ago community members reminded each other not to 
> do that. The mantra, if I recall, was that it wasn't about soliciting upvotes 
> or downvotes, but rather about posting thoughtful critiques, new takes on the 
> the idea, alternative designs, etc.
> 
> So I guess I'd sum up the point as this: in the current setup, everyone's 
> message is treated equally (unless it exceeds the max email size limit, ugh); 
> in a forum, everyone's likes are treated equally. Are we unsatisfied with the 
> current community ethos? Do we want the evolution process to be about what 
> ideas garnered the most votes and whose thoughts are most popular?

These are really interesting points.  From my perspective, I'm not quite so 
concerned about this because of how I have witnessed the evolution process 
working in practice.  Everyone's message is not treated equally — instead they 
are evaluated based on the quality of their substance.  When arguments for or 
against evolution proposals get evaluated — and eventually arbitrated into a 
decision — it is rarely a strict popularity contest for an idea, but rather a 
balancing of the arguments made.  Essentially your comment about "thoughtful 
critiques", which ultimately I think provides the most meaningful guidance 
towards reaching decisions on language changes.  That's not to say that a ton 
of +1's on an argument doesn't have signal — but I'd never like to see that 
become a direct "vote".







_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Reply via email to