From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Qi2iE-0003FX-EA for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 11:07:10 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.213.175 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.213.175; envelope-from=witchspace81@gmail.com; helo=mail-yx0-f175.google.com; Received: from mail-yx0-f175.google.com ([209.85.213.175]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Qi2iC-00023w-4V for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 11:07:10 +0000 Received: by yxi19 with SMTP id 19so1039943yxi.34 for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 04:07:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.150.150.40 with SMTP id x40mr3346935ybd.207.1310814422649; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 04:07:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.151.14.9 with HTTP; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 04:07:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1310813679.2195.0.camel@Desktop666> References: <1310813679.2195.0.camel@Desktop666> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 11:07:02 +0000 Message-ID: From: John Smith To: Matt Corallo Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd6cf08074be804a82dc442 X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 1.7 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist [URIs: bluematt.me] -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (witchspace81[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.1 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in digit (witchspace81[at]gmail.com) 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature -0.8 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-Headers-End: 1Qi2iC-00023w-4V Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] The forums... X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 11:07:10 -0000 --000e0cd6cf08074be804a82dc442 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Matt Corallo wrote: > If we had the moding power, yes, but we don't have nearly enough people > who could mod such a forum. > I think a simpler forum would also be easier to moderate. Main criterion: is it helpful to users? If not, lock/remove it. Two categories: Technical Support, Development (which can be split up between client work, and other software/websites integrating bitcoin). Those two can be replicated per language if a large enough group exists in that country that is also willing to maintain order. I have no problems with volunteering some time moderating, but not on the current forums. If this is really a capacity issue then IMO we should simply remove the link and come up with an alternative medium to address user issues (such as a moderated mailing list). But I don't really believe this. There's a ton of successful forums that did pick the right structure and helpful moderators, and a lot of them are volunteer-driven. JS --000e0cd6cf08074be804a82dc442 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Matt Coral= lo <bitcoi= n-list@bluematt.me> wrote:
If we had the moding power, yes, but we don't have nearly enough people=
who could mod such a forum.


I think a simpler forum would also be easier to moderate. Main criterion: = is it helpful to users? If not, lock/remove it.

Two categories: Technical Support, Development (which can be split up=20 between client work, and other software/websites integrating bitcoin).

Those two can be replicated per language if a large enough group exists in = that country that is also willing to maintain order.

I have no problems with volunteering some time moderating, but not on the c= urrent forums.

If this is really a capacity issue then IMO we should simply remove the=20 link and come up with an alternative medium to address user issues (such as= a moderated mailing list).=A0 But I don't really believe this. There's a ton of successful forums th= at did pick the right structure and helpful moderators, and a lot of them are=20 volunteer-driven.

JS=A0

--000e0cd6cf08074be804a82dc442--