public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Scotese <dscotese@litmocracy.com>
To: xor@freenetproject.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Three Month bitcoin-dev Moderation Review
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 20:35:39 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGLBAhd7DCcRiJ6SZvJ9hEBWvBnmgRWKLL00yxaeiGSEbNKNwQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2998879.R5sQRbxZRv@1337h4x0r>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2725 bytes --]

I agree with the prohibition of +1s.  The core competency of those who
provide this list are moderation and technology, not managing a process
through which "involved people [indicate] whether they're for or against
it."

That is certainly an excellent function, but it can be offered by anyone
who wants to run a system for collecting and displaying those indications.
The email list itself is intended to be information rich, and such
"approval voting" is not information-rich enough in my view.

It is a shame that the moderated messages require so many steps to
retrieve.  Is it possible to have the "downloadable version" from
https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev-moderation/ for each month
contain the text of the moderated emails?  They do contain the subjects, so
that helps.

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 6:25 PM, xor--- via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> 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?
> It's very strange that this is not allowed - especially if we consider that
> the Bitcoin community is in a state of constant dissent currently.
> The effect is likely that you push the actual decision-making to IRC, which
> less people have access to (since it's difficult to bear the high traffic),
> and thus form some kind of "inner circle" - which makes decisions seem even
> more as if they're being dictated.
>
> So please consider allowing people to say whether they agree with something
> something or don't.
>
>
> Other than that, thanks for the good latency of moderation, I guess you're
> doing hard work there :)
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>


-- 
I like to provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do you need a
techie?
I own Litmocracy <http://www.litmocracy.com> and Meme Racing
<http://www.memeracing.net> (in alpha).
I'm the webmaster for The Voluntaryist <http://www.voluntaryist.com> which
now accepts Bitcoin.
I also code for The Dollar Vigilante <http://dollarvigilante.com/>.
"He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules" - Satoshi
Nakamoto

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3744 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2016-01-21  4:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-01-21  0:50 [bitcoin-dev] Three Month bitcoin-dev Moderation Review Rusty Russell
2016-01-21  2:25 ` xor
2016-01-21  4:35   ` Dave Scotese [this message]
2016-01-21  5:00     ` Rusty Russell
2016-01-21  4:44   ` Rusty Russell
2016-01-23  5:33     ` xor
2016-01-23 20:59       ` Peter Todd
2016-01-23 21:38         ` Gavin
2016-01-24  1:06           ` Dave Scotese
2016-02-09 23:24             ` David Vorick

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAGLBAhd7DCcRiJ6SZvJ9hEBWvBnmgRWKLL00yxaeiGSEbNKNwQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=dscotese@litmocracy.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=xor@freenetproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox