Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

[Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3639 bytes --]

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:48 PM, M. J. Everitt <m.j.everitt@iee.org> wrote:

> On 10/01/18 19:31, Alec Warner wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:06 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>> W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 09∶11 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner
>> napisał:
>> > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:55 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org>
>> wrote:
>> > > W dniu wto, 09.01.2018 o godzinie 17∶08 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner
>> > > napisał:
>> > > > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Andreas K. Huettel <
>> dilfridge@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> > > > > During the last Gentoo council meeting, the decision was made to
>> implement
>> > > > > changes to the gentoo-dev mailing list [1].
>> > > > >
>> > > > > These changes affect only the gentoo-dev mailing list, and will
>> come into
>> > > > > effect on 23 January 2018.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > * Subscribing to the list and receiving list mail remains as it
>> is now.
>> > > > > * Posting to the list will only be possible to Gentoo developers
>> and
>> > > > >   whitelisted additional participants.
>> > > > > * Whitelisting requires that one developer vouches for you. We
>> intend this
>> > > > >   to be as unbureaucratic as possible.
>> > > > > * Obviously, repeated off-topic posting as well as behaviour
>> against the
>> > > > >   Code of Conduct [2] will lead to revocation of the posting
>> permission.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > If, as a non-developer, you want to participate in a discussion on
>> > > > > gentoo-dev,
>> > > > > - either reply directly to the author of a list mail and ask
>> him/her to
>> > > > > forward your message,
>> > > > > - or ask any Gentoo developer of your choice to get you
>> whitelisted.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > If, as a developer, you want to have someone whitelisted, please
>> comment on
>> > > > > bug 644070 [3]. Similar to Bugzilla editbugs permission, if you
>> are vouching
>> > > > > for a contributor you are expected to keep an eye on their
>> activity.
>> > > >
>> > > > It seems like the obvious way this fails is some Gentoo developer
>> acks
>> > > > one of the problem people. I don't think that's particularly
>> unlikely.
>> > > > Then what do we do?
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > Then it becomes comrel business.
>> >
>> > If that was an effective solution, wouldn't the problem already be
>> solved?
>>
>> One of the problems mentioned before was that a person could easily
>> evade the ban via subscribing from another e-mail address. In this case
>> it's no longer possible, as he would need to obtain the vouching for his
>> new e-mail address, and for that he would first have to have something
>> positive to post.
>>
>> Of course this relies on developers not vouching for new people out of
>> the blue but expecting them to have something to contribute first.
>>
>
> This sounds like an amazing fundraising opportunity.
>
> https://www.gentoo.org/donate/
>
> Get membership posting privs.
>
> -A
>
>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Michał Górny
>>
>>
>>
> Do I read a hint of sarcasm there too Alec?! :]
>

As I (attempted badly) to explain on IRC; I don't like this decision. But
ultimately the project elects the council to do stuff like this.
As engineers I think we remain bad at making decisions that are imperfect,
or based on incomplete information. I don't
fault the council for taking action (even action I don't like) because I
believe they felt something had to be done to improve the lists.

No one should be afraid to try something because it might not work; trying
things are how we learn.

-A

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7346 bytes --]