On Sunday, April 12, 2020 1:15:23 PM PDT Russ Allbery wrote: > 1. A database-driven discussion system that supports updates lets you go > beyond the moderation that you're worried about (rejecting messages) > and do other forms of moderation that help improve the quality of > discussion without removing messages. Examples include splitting > threads that have digressed from the original topic to create more > focused discussions, pinning important summaries so that people see the > current status of the discusison quickly, closing old threads so that > people properly open a new discussion instead of replying to some > resolved discussion with a different problem, and even just sorting, > classifying, and tagging threads so that people can find the > discussions they care about more easily. > > 2. You can indicate agreement with a proposal or message without adding > more words that everyone has to read. The +1 reply in email is clunky > and adds a lot of noise. Often it's useful to be able to get a quick > count of participants who agree with an idea but don't want to write > their own extended message about it.
The usability concerns that you outlined are legitimate. And some usability perks are indeed nice to have. But the price is too high: 1. I am now limited to Web Browser with JavaScript enabled. On mobile I am limited to the browser or centrally owned and developed app. Here is what is wrong with this: - You are making a God-like judgement call that everyone must have graphical environment running, with a hardware powerful enough to run a browser with JavaScript. This line of thinking is very much alike to racial and gender inclusion problems. Why do you think you can make this call for everyone? You can run email client on a much weaker and non-mainstream hardware. On top of that try feeding HTML into a TTS and put yourself in a position of people with limited abilities. - There are only 2 browsers out there in existence (Firefox and Chrome variants) and duopoly in browser market is already alarming enough. There are much more email clients available. 2. I can't now use email the way I did. Discord's email interface is subpar in spite of what sales people tell you. So If I want "a first-class citizen" experience I am stuck with option 1 > 3. There is some age correlation with the type of communication mechanism > one is comfortable with, and reason to believe that younger people skew > towards being more comfortable with forums than with email. If you > didn't have to learn email client skills (particularly the type that > Debian demands, which are drastically different than how email is used > in most jobs), it's not very welcoming to have to learn those skills in > order to participate in the project. It is similar to saying that learning language, etiquette and how to be polite, how to listen to others is too hard and not welcoming to those barbarians toddlers that don't know how to talk. If all they want to eat is sugar and candy it doesn't mean that it the right thing to do. > They're a lot less trivial than I > think people who have been using email for a long time realize. I've > had nearly 30 years to hone my ability to quickly sort through huge > quantities of email and reply in a readable way, which means it's easy > for me to forget how much work that took, how much effort I've put into > customizing and learning a top-end email client, and how many of the > rules are inobvious and arcane. Not everyone is like you. > And yet the Internet is full of successfully moderated forums that create > very little drama because they're just quietly more usable. The definition of success is disputable here. "Heroin is so cool because there are so many junkies! Lets give Debian users some too" > You have to trust the moderators, So far I am not convinced that I can trust you to moderate. > and you have to have some mechanism to > evaluate that trust and to discuss it and possibly revoke it if something > goes horribly awry. Prevention should always be the first step. Something WILL go wrong but you are too blinded by the immediate sugar candy in front of you. > I think it's also worth pointing out that Debian users currently trust > Debian developers with the security of their computers, which I think is a > higher bar than trusting other Debian developers with the moderation of > our discussions. > These discussions often strike me as being weirdly > disproportional and inconsistent about how we extend trust. Nothing disproportionate. I can inspect their work in source code. How will I inspect the results of moderation (especially with the "Ask forgiveness not permission" kind of attitude that you are advocating)
