-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Hi all -
I've enabled temporary moderation for the list.
The purpose of this moderation is not to censor anybody's opinions, but to provide a speed bump for high-temper exchanges.
I'd like to please ask for list members who feel the need to post ten one-line responses to each other about who's more impolite to consider slowing down, smelling the roses, and holding off on their responses until there's something _new_ to add to the conversation.
Thanks, and sorry for the inconvenience.
- -- brion vibber (brion @ wikimedia.org)
Thankyou so much for this! Please keep the moderation enabled forever :-)
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Hi all -
I've enabled temporary moderation for the list.
The purpose of this moderation is not to censor anybody's opinions, but to provide a speed bump for high-temper exchanges.
I'd like to please ask for list members who feel the need to post ten one-line responses to each other about who's more impolite to consider slowing down, smelling the roses, and holding off on their responses until there's something _new_ to add to the conversation.
Thanks, and sorry for the inconvenience.
- -- brion vibber (brion @ wikimedia.org)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkgFF28ACgkQwRnhpk1wk44PEACfSMrQkgITwTZxnm1sHkq6+k6X 4A4An0/AyzI4GwGsPA7JDqlGKxsWxdxc =vfEO -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Luiz Augusto wrote:
Thankyou so much for this! Please keep the moderation enabled forever :-)
I do not share your enthousiasm.
First because I never thought collective punishment was a cool thing to do. Second because the list moderators (who are not Brion) may not be so happy at the idea of moderating 30 emails per day.
I would be much happier with generously and frequently putting in moderation carefully selected editors (anyone who might be considered trolling a bit too much at some point, it might be many of us).
Ant
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Hi all -
I've enabled temporary moderation for the list.
The purpose of this moderation is not to censor anybody's opinions, but to provide a speed bump for high-temper exchanges.
I'd like to please ask for list members who feel the need to post ten one-line responses to each other about who's more impolite to consider slowing down, smelling the roses, and holding off on their responses until there's something _new_ to add to the conversation.
Thanks, and sorry for the inconvenience.
- -- brion vibber (brion @ wikimedia.org)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkgFF28ACgkQwRnhpk1wk44PEACfSMrQkgITwTZxnm1sHkq6+k6X 4A4An0/AyzI4GwGsPA7JDqlGKxsWxdxc =vfEO -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Florence Devouard wrote:
Luiz Augusto wrote:
Thankyou so much for this! Please keep the moderation enabled forever :-)
I do not share your enthousiasm.
First because I never thought collective punishment was a cool thing to do.
Moderation isn't a punishment; it's a tool for slowing down an overactive discussion so that posts can be made thoughtfully by many parties, instead of being dominated by quick back-and-forth between a few parties who happen to be online at the same time.
Second because the list moderators (who are not Brion) may not be so happy at the idea of moderating 30 emails per day.
Actually, I am one of the list mods. I wouldn't force someone else to do that for me!
I would be much happier with generously and frequently putting in moderation carefully selected editors (anyone who might be considered trolling a bit too much at some point, it might be many of us).
More generally useful would be a speed bump for particular _threads_. Moderating individual posters singles them out and both looks and feels like "punishment".
Further discussion would be more helpful if directed to actual implementation of automated speedbump-style moderation; if you have experience with this sort of configuration or patches for GNU Mailman, please contact me offlist or direct it to wikitech-l.
- -- brion vibber (brion @ wikimedia.org)
Brion Vibber wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Florence Devouard wrote:
Luiz Augusto wrote:
Thankyou so much for this! Please keep the moderation enabled forever :-)
I do not share your enthousiasm.
First because I never thought collective punishment was a cool thing to do.
Moderation isn't a punishment; it's a tool for slowing down an overactive discussion so that posts can be made thoughtfully by many parties, instead of being dominated by quick back-and-forth between a few parties who happen to be online at the same time.
I respectfully disagree. When you moderate by default, that also means that you decide when you liberate emails, hence disrupting the flow of conversation. Depending on your own availability, emails may be liberated every hour, or suffer a 12 hours delay, effectively allowing a free flow at certains hours, and preventing the discussion at other hours. You may also delay emails differently depending on people (or just because an email is too long to read, whilst another is super short), hence again disrupting the flow of discussion. Last, it can create overlap of answers to a question (since no one saw that someone else had already answered the question). In short, various inconveniences... created only because of a few disrupting individuals.
Second because the list moderators (who are not Brion) may not be so happy at the idea of moderating 30 emails per day.
Actually, I am one of the list mods. I wouldn't force someone else to do that for me!
First I heard that you are one of this list moderators. Moderators of that list used to be Michael and Austin.
I would be much happier with generously and frequently putting in moderation carefully selected editors (anyone who might be considered trolling a bit too much at some point, it might be many of us).
More generally useful would be a speed bump for particular _threads_. Moderating individual posters singles them out and both looks and feels like "punishment".
Further discussion would be more helpful if directed to actual implementation of automated speedbump-style moderation; if you have experience with this sort of configuration or patches for GNU Mailman, please contact me offlist or direct it to wikitech-l.
Yeah, if that is possible.
- -- brion vibber (brion @ wikimedia.org)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
A few months ago, Austin and I were list mod of Foundation-l. Several times, I put some guys in moderation. And then, I heard that the Foundation was censoring some people. I thought about it carefully. Thought that my putting Anthony and co in moderation was not censorship at all, but moderation. Yeah.
Still, it travelled through my mind, and I decided to drop the moderation of that list, to make it clear that people could (as long as they respected basic rules of civility and usefulness) freely speak.
I called for volunteers. Michael agreed to do that "not fun" job. Which is why our two list mods are Michael and Austin.
Both independant individuals.
You know what Brion... I love you very very much. Yeah, that much. And I agree some guys or some topics should be moderated. And I trust you just did that totally in good faith.
But... adding yourself as list mod, then moderating everyone, in your position of CTO of the Foundation... does not strike me as being a good move really. It is in the same fluffy area than NDA, non-disparagement agreements, blogs only editable after approval by staff etc...
But well, that is probably just me :-)
Bisous
Ant
I echo Florence's concerns. I believe it was a highly inappropriate maneuver and in protest, I do not intend to post to this list again until this moderation is removed. I hope others will join me in this effort.
-Dan Rosenthal On Apr 16, 2008, at 8:22 PM, Florence Devouard wrote:
Brion Vibber wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Florence Devouard wrote:
Luiz Augusto wrote:
Thankyou so much for this! Please keep the moderation enabled forever :-)
I do not share your enthousiasm.
First because I never thought collective punishment was a cool thing to do.
Moderation isn't a punishment; it's a tool for slowing down an overactive discussion so that posts can be made thoughtfully by many parties, instead of being dominated by quick back-and-forth between a few parties who happen to be online at the same time.
I respectfully disagree. When you moderate by default, that also means that you decide when you liberate emails, hence disrupting the flow of conversation. Depending on your own availability, emails may be liberated every hour, or suffer a 12 hours delay, effectively allowing a free flow at certains hours, and preventing the discussion at other hours. You may also delay emails differently depending on people (or just because an email is too long to read, whilst another is super short), hence again disrupting the flow of discussion. Last, it can create overlap of answers to a question (since no one saw that someone else had already answered the question). In short, various inconveniences... created only because of a few disrupting individuals.
Second because the list moderators (who are not Brion) may not be so happy at the idea of moderating 30 emails per day.
Actually, I am one of the list mods. I wouldn't force someone else to do that for me!
First I heard that you are one of this list moderators. Moderators of that list used to be Michael and Austin.
I would be much happier with generously and frequently putting in moderation carefully selected editors (anyone who might be considered trolling a bit too much at some point, it might be many of us).
More generally useful would be a speed bump for particular _threads_. Moderating individual posters singles them out and both looks and feels like "punishment".
Further discussion would be more helpful if directed to actual implementation of automated speedbump-style moderation; if you have experience with this sort of configuration or patches for GNU Mailman, please contact me offlist or direct it to wikitech-l.
Yeah, if that is possible.
- -- brion vibber (brion @ wikimedia.org)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
A few months ago, Austin and I were list mod of Foundation-l. Several times, I put some guys in moderation. And then, I heard that the Foundation was censoring some people. I thought about it carefully. Thought that my putting Anthony and co in moderation was not censorship at all, but moderation. Yeah.
Still, it travelled through my mind, and I decided to drop the moderation of that list, to make it clear that people could (as long as they respected basic rules of civility and usefulness) freely speak.
I called for volunteers. Michael agreed to do that "not fun" job. Which is why our two list mods are Michael and Austin.
Both independant individuals.
You know what Brion... I love you very very much. Yeah, that much. And I agree some guys or some topics should be moderated. And I trust you just did that totally in good faith.
But... adding yourself as list mod, then moderating everyone, in your position of CTO of the Foundation... does not strike me as being a good move really. It is in the same fluffy area than NDA, non-disparagement agreements, blogs only editable after approval by staff etc...
But well, that is probably just me :-)
Bisous
Ant
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Dan Rosenthal wrote:
I echo Florence's concerns. I believe it was a highly inappropriate maneuver and in protest, I do not intend to post to this list again until this moderation is removed. I hope others will join me in this effort.
-Dan Rosenthal On Apr 16, 2008, at 8:22 PM, Florence Devouard wrote:
Dan,
You're a powerful man. :)
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2008-April/041526.html
Jon wrote:
Dan Rosenthal wrote:
I echo Florence's concerns. I believe it was a highly inappropriate maneuver and in protest, I do not intend to post to this list again until this moderation is removed. I hope others will join me in this effort.
-Dan Rosenthal On Apr 16, 2008, at 8:22 PM, Florence Devouard wrote:
Dan,
You're a powerful man. :)
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2008-April/041526.html
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Meant that to be off-list. Sorry folks.
Jon
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 7:58 PM, Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com wrote:
I echo Florence's concerns. I believe it was a highly inappropriate maneuver and in protest, I do not intend to post to this list again until this moderation is removed. I hope others will join me in this effort.
You're about five minutes too late, but I hope others will join me in welcoming you back.
Austin
Well that was fast! Thanks Austin.
-Dan On Apr 16, 2008, at 9:02 PM, Austin Hair wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 7:58 PM, Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com wrote:
I echo Florence's concerns. I believe it was a highly inappropriate maneuver and in protest, I do not intend to post to this list again until this moderation is removed. I hope others will join me in this effort.
You're about five minutes too late, but I hope others will join me in welcoming you back.
Austin
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 16/04/2008, Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
I do not share your enthousiasm.
First because I never thought collective punishment was a cool thing to do. Second because the list moderators (who are not Brion) may not be so happy at the idea of moderating 30 emails per day.
I would be much happier with generously and frequently putting in moderation carefully selected editors (anyone who might be considered trolling a bit too much at some point, it might be many of us).
Ant
Perhaps he discussed with the mods? But I agree with Anthere - collective "punishment" is a bad idea here. And it can be a lot more than 30 emails.
I second Alex and Florence's concerns, but I see where Brion is trying to go with it (sorry, don't have that much experience with Mailman, I apologize), and I like that.
Although I must admit, not getting multiple dozens of e-mails in a day is a nice change.
-Chad
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 7:31 PM, Majorly axel9891@googlemail.com wrote:
On 16/04/2008, Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
I do not share your enthousiasm.
First because I never thought collective punishment was a cool thing to do. Second because the list moderators (who are not Brion) may not be so happy at the idea of moderating 30 emails per day.
I would be much happier with generously and frequently putting in moderation carefully selected editors (anyone who might be considered trolling a bit too much at some point, it might be many of us).
Ant
Perhaps he discussed with the mods? But I agree with Anthere - collective "punishment" is a bad idea here. And it can be a lot more than 30 emails.
-- Alex (Majorly)
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Majorly
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I hope everyone enjoyed the break, and had a chance to reflect on the tone this list's taken of late.
I've turned moderation off. Please be kind, assume good faith, and remember that this isn't a chat room. Heated, rapid-fire exchanges have no place here.
Austin
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Hi all -
I've enabled temporary moderation for the list.
The purpose of this moderation is not to censor anybody's opinions, but to provide a speed bump for high-temper exchanges.
I'd like to please ask for list members who feel the need to post ten one-line responses to each other about who's more impolite to consider slowing down, smelling the roses, and holding off on their responses until there's something _new_ to add to the conversation.
Thanks, and sorry for the inconvenience.
- -- brion vibber (brion @ wikimedia.org)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkgFF28ACgkQwRnhpk1wk44PEACfSMrQkgITwTZxnm1sHkq6+k6X 4A4An0/AyzI4GwGsPA7JDqlGKxsWxdxc =vfEO -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 4/16/08, Austin Hair adhair@gmail.com wrote:
I hope everyone enjoyed the break, and had a chance to reflect on the tone this list's taken of late.
I've turned moderation off. Please be kind, assume good faith, and remember that this isn't a chat room. Heated, rapid-fire exchanges have no place here.
Thanks Austin; thanks Brion.
I think, after waiting a few days to separate it from this particular discussion, it will be useful to have a conversation on this list about moderation styles and methods, and facilitation techniques that we could use to have more constructive conversations. Just as we do on the wiki through the development of guidelines and policies, it makes sense to me that we try to improve our methods of public discussion over time.
I think it was already pointed out many times here that mailing lists are the stone age technology for discussions. Virtually everything else is better suited. This might be a good starting point.
Cheers, Yaroslav
On 4/16/08, Austin Hair adhair@gmail.com wrote:
I hope everyone enjoyed the break, and had a chance to reflect on the tone this list's taken of late.
I've turned moderation off. Please be kind, assume good faith, and remember that this isn't a chat room. Heated, rapid-fire exchanges have no place here.
Thanks Austin; thanks Brion.
I think, after waiting a few days to separate it from this particular discussion, it will be useful to have a conversation on this list about moderation styles and methods, and facilitation techniques that we could use to have more constructive conversations. Just as we do on the wiki through the development of guidelines and policies, it makes sense to me that we try to improve our methods of public discussion over time. -- Erik M?ller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 2:21 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ru wrote:
I think it was already pointed out many times here that mailing lists are the stone age technology for discussions. Virtually everything else is better suited. This might be a good starting point.
It's a nonstarter. If you absolutely don't like mailing lists no matter what, you don't have to subscribe. Otherwise, there are lots of technologies that have been developed to make mailing lists quite palatable, and in my opinion superior to other cheap (free) and easily implemented alternatives. Mailing lists are only stone age technology if you're using stone age email software. (Or, unfortunately, if one of the mailing list participants is using especially stone-age email software, but in those rare cases that participant can be moderated rather than everyone, and in practice peer pressure is generally enough to get them to stop.)
Agreed. I use Gmail's web client, and it makes mailing lists very simple to follow. No different from reading a message board, and certainly easier to follow than an on-wiki discussion--where you try to follow indentions to keep the conversation intact, but have to largely rely on timestamps to construct the order of thoughts.
Plenty of other ancient technologies are still in use; doesn't make them bad. Saying "we should use something else" without any real suggestions isn't going to get us anywhere.
-Chad
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 2:21 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ru wrote:
I think it was already pointed out many times here that mailing lists are the stone age technology for discussions. Virtually everything else is better suited. This might be a good starting point.
It's a nonstarter. If you absolutely don't like mailing lists no matter what, you don't have to subscribe. Otherwise, there are lots of technologies that have been developed to make mailing lists quite palatable, and in my opinion superior to other cheap (free) and easily implemented alternatives. Mailing lists are only stone age technology if you're using stone age email software. (Or, unfortunately, if one of the mailing list participants is using especially stone-age email software, but in those rare cases that participant can be moderated rather than everyone, and in practice peer pressure is generally enough to get them to stop.)
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 2:56 AM, Austin Hair adhair@gmail.com wrote:
Please be kind, assume good faith, and remember that this isn't a chat room. Heated, rapid-fire exchanges have no place here.
May we or list mods use something similar before moderation is set to on?
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org