On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 7:02 PM, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I sympathize with your concern, Ori. I suspect,
however, that it shows a
fundamental misunderstanding of why the Teahouse works when other processes
(several of which have included cute symbols) have been less effective.
And the reason is: the Teahouse is explicitly designed for having
conversations.
Teahouse "convenors" were initially selected for their demonstrated
communication skills and willingness to remain polite when dealing with
often frustrated people, and their ability to explain often complex
concepts in straightforward terms. As their ranks have evolved, they have
sought out and taught others those skills, and there's an element of
self-selection that discourages the more curmudgeonly amongst us from
participating. (There's not a lot of overlap between those who regularly
help out at the Teahouse and those who hang out on ANI, for example.)
We're talking about a relatively small group of people who really excel at
this type of communication, although it is certainly a skill that others
can develop if they have the willingness and inclination - but it really
comes down to being able to identify the right "level" at which to talk to
people, and then actually talking.
The Teahouse works because it doesn't [obviously] use a lot of fancy
technology, because it doesn't use a lot of templates and automated
messaging, because it's made a lot of effort to avoid massive hyperlinking
to complex and inscrutable policies. It's people talking to people.
Yes, fair point. But as long as there exists a need for developing new
features and modifying existing ones, I would like us to consider the
contribution that modifications to the user experience make to the
interpersonal climate on the wikis. Because the contribution is very much
greater than zero. Of course at the end of the day it is about people
making choices about how they relate to one another, and no amount of
Fisher-Price gadgetry will ever change that. But we don't communicate via mind
melds <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulcan_(Star_Trek)#Mind_melds>; we use
imperfect and idiosyncratic media which end up shaping and coloring both
what we communicate and how it is received. So we ought to think carefully
about these effects.¹
(By the way, there was a great Radiolab <http://www.radiolab.org/> episode
about this recently: The Trust Engineers
<http://www.radiolab.org/story/trust-engineers/>. Keep in mind that I am
recommending the *episode*, not endorsing all the practices it describes,
some of which make me queasy.)
¹ Concrete example: the way that jenkins-bot gives you a -1 for changes it
can't rebase. Ugh!