public inbox for gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Items for Council Agenda, May 14
Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 06:52:48 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_=OhujaoWpQBPK8RGEmeSRtYY2sxcncmXBQqyfvv0TuFQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170511220840.5700e21d@katipo2.lan>

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 6:08 AM, Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> But for regulating misbehaving operators who can trivially find a new
> identity to hide behind, these tools as presented so far seem a bit
> toothless.
>
> Unless this proposal suggests that all new senders are themselves,
> defacto-censored.
>

++

As many have pointed out, people can just get around bans by creating
new identities.  That won't be an issue for devs, but certainly it is
an issue for non-devs.

I don't really see the point in doing moderation unless it is
before-the-fact.  We'll just be playing whack-a-mole and making people
upset without actually changing anything.

Yes, doing it before the fact has both philosophical and practical
challenges.  We need to accept those and make a decision one way or
the other.  I think this is one of those cases where either decision
is better than compromise.  If we don't have the manpower to moderate
posts by non-devs then we shouldn't moderate them at all.  If we
consider it against our values then we shouldn't.

I also think we need to be consistent.  If we're going to moderate,
then do it everywhere, or at least be prepared to do it everywhere
without further debate when problems arise.  If we're not going to
moderate, then we should just embrace the results.  I think that
having more moderation on some forums than others just creates the
inevitable complaint on one forum when somebody can't post on another,
and we have no principle to fall back on.

> But if we set up a system where new contributors are defacto-censored, ...
> that's not really the sort of Gentoo I want to be part of.

Honestly, I think we'll lose people either way (and we probably have
been losing them for years with the status quo).  Certainly they'll be
different people, but there isn't really any hard data one way or the
other as to which will have the larger impact.  Trying to collect some
kind of data around preferences might help here, though I'm not sure
it will make anybody more/less happy with the outcome either way.

-- 
Rich


  reply	other threads:[~2017-05-11 10:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-04-29 17:00 [gentoo-project] Items for Council Agenda, May 14 Anthony G. Basile
2017-04-30 13:52 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2017-05-03 21:26   ` Daniel Campbell
2017-05-06 14:34 ` arches.desc & GLEP 72 (was: Re: [gentoo-project] Items for Council Agenda, May 14) Andreas K. Huettel
2017-05-06 16:35   ` [gentoo-dev] " Michał Górny
2017-05-06 17:36     ` Andreas K. Huettel
2017-05-06 20:23       ` Michał Górny
2017-05-07  2:53         ` Kent Fredric
2017-05-07 20:30       ` Michał Górny
2017-05-08 11:46         ` Andreas K. Huettel
2017-05-13  0:03     ` Andreas K. Huettel
2017-05-13  7:44       ` Michał Górny
2017-05-13 22:48         ` Andreas K. Huettel
2017-05-07 15:47   ` Roy Bamford
2017-05-14 15:38     ` Andreas K. Huettel
2017-05-11  7:17 ` [gentoo-project] Items for Council Agenda, May 14 Matthias Maier
2017-05-11  7:52   ` NP-Hardass
2017-05-11  8:02     ` Michał Górny
2017-05-11  9:16       ` Raymond Jennings
2017-05-11 10:08   ` Kent Fredric
2017-05-11 10:52     ` Rich Freeman [this message]
2017-05-11 15:03       ` Gregory Woodbury
2017-05-11 16:45   ` Luis Ressel
2017-05-11 19:57     ` Rich Freeman
2017-05-11 20:24       ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-05-11 20:28       ` Michał Górny
2017-05-13  9:26       ` Kent Fredric
2017-05-14  1:46         ` M. J. Everitt
2017-05-11 18:55   ` Roy Bamford
2017-05-11 19:09     ` Raymond Jennings
2017-05-11 19:54       ` Rich Freeman
2017-05-13  9:14       ` Kent Fredric
2017-05-11 20:25   ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-05-11 23:07   ` Daniel Campbell
2017-05-12  8:52     ` Roy Bamford
2017-05-12 10:41       ` Andreas K. Huettel
2017-05-13  9:36         ` Daniel Campbell

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='CAGfcS_=OhujaoWpQBPK8RGEmeSRtYY2sxcncmXBQqyfvv0TuFQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=rich0@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.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