From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A077CD2 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 04:44:59 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from ozlabs.org (ozlabs.org [103.22.144.67]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1F9BEB for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 04:44:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ozlabs.org (Postfix, from userid 1011) id 3E816140B9C; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 15:44:57 +1100 (AEDT) From: Rusty Russell To: xor@freenetproject.org, bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org In-Reply-To: <2998879.R5sQRbxZRv@1337h4x0r> References: <87si1rycux.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <2998879.R5sQRbxZRv@1337h4x0r> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.20.2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.5.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 15:14:47 +1030 Message-ID: <87powvy20w.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Three Month bitcoin-dev Moderation Review X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 04:44:59 -0000 xor--- via bitcoin-dev writes: > On Thursday, January 21, 2016 11:20:46 AM Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev wrote: >> So, what should moderation look like from now on? > > The original mail which announced moderation contains this rule: >> - Generally discouraged: [...], +1s, [...] > > I assume "+1s" means statements such as "I agree with doing X". > > Any sane procedure of deciding something includes asking the involved people > whether they're for or against it. > If there are dozens of proposals on how to solve a particular technical > problem, how else do you want to decide it than having a vote? +1s here means simpling say "+1" or "me too" that carries no additional information. ie. if you like an idea, that's great, but it's not worth interruping the entire list for. If you say "I prefer proposal X over Y because " that's different. As is "I dislike X because " or "I need X because ". Hope that clarifies! Rusty.