Hello!
I woke up today, with the first thing on my todo list: submit a ticket to
create a design@ML account. (Sry Kxepal!)
But then, I did not expect all the responses :)
It is a pleasant surprise for one of my proposal to generate so many emails.
It means that the community is *active*, and that people are passionate and
feel empowered enough to have an opinion to make it a better place. And good
ideas are always welcome remember?
I really like that everyone is welcome to voice their opinions and thoughts on
the mailing list.
No one is a mind reader. But reading gives us a secret power to reading
thoughts.
The mailing list gives me a searchable, and easy way to keep up with
everything, it is nearly real-time,
but can also work async, and it also gives people the chance to formulate their
thoughts a bit better than IRC.
I thought that a design@ML would be best for this,
HOWEVER, now after reading the discussion, I have changed my mind, and now
believe that that hosting design discussions for designers would be better on a
platform like medium.com, or at least someplace where we can host screenshots
of our ideas.
That is a good idea! I am going to submit a proposal to do that instead of the
mailing list idea.
It will *SHOW* we are really trying to make the community a welcome place for
designers,
in their own language, without the overhead of a ML.
Lets move our platform-for-design-for-CouchDB discussion stuff there.
The other stuff:
- You guys are arguing over what will make the CouchDB community
better, the MOST. This is a bit silly, but makes me smile, and my heart swell
with pride and happiness that everyone is on-board and trying making this
better.
- All of this is hard to do.
- I think everyone is doing a good job.
Michelle
PS. ermouth: I am sorry Cloudant broke somethings of yours. We were trying to
make things safer. We did not mean to intentionally break anything.
> On Sep 14, 2015, at 9:22 AM, ermouth <ermo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think it comes back to trust, if we all trust each other
>> that we have the best of the project in mind
>
> If @kxepal says there is no activity in www@ – he is right. Facts are
> stubborn things. If he predicts there will be no users in design@ with
> current approach – he is right.
>
> I can‘t imagine @kxepal don‘t trust you, or Robert, or Michelle. Surely, he
> trust. He just pointing out real problems, and this is absolutely ortogonal
> to trust.
>
> Not everyone pointing out a problem can immidiately propose a solution.
> Issue fixing starts from bug itself, not from patch. And I can‘t imagine,
> how you can start bug report with ‘Yes, and...’. There is nothing barbarian
> in ‘It won‘t work in this way’ or ‘But how about this?’.
>
>> That’s the kind of stuff that makes we very very tired participating here
>
> Sorry, but just repeating your own words: ‘If that makes you want to
> unsubscribe, farewell’. Writing it not to prick you, but to point out, that
> if you issue rules about friendliness, you better obey them by yourself
> first.
>
>> [Alexnder Shorin] What really hurts conversations is false-positive
> feedback, when you
>> have to lie people and lie to yourself about foreign ideas.
>
> Absolutely. +1000.
>
> ermouth
>
> 2015-09-14 15:49 GMT+03:00 Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org>:
>
>>
>>> On 14 Sep 2015, at 14:42, ermouth <ermo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I’m suggesting a way how we can adopt a proven way
>>>> If that makes you want to unsubscribe, farewell.
>>>
>>> That is exactly what I called iron ordnung. Extreme unfriendliness is
>> only
>>> allowed for your here, Jan. The one thing I fear now is that people are
>>> afraid to say ‘but’, or take a contrarian position in general. How can we
>>> avoid that?
>>
>> I think it comes back to trust, if we all trust each other, that we have
>> the best of the project in mind, we shouldn’t have a problem disagreeing
>> with each other.
>>
>> If you come at this is discussion from “if this happens, I’ll leave the
>> project”, then you probably don’t trust me to make good suggestions about
>> our culture. How can I improve that?
>>
>>
>>> Without phrases ‘You don‘t like it? Farewell’, surely.
>>
>> I’m sorry for the harsh tone, but I’m also really fed up with lazy excuses
>> of why we shouldn’t be a better community, and I especially called this out
>> in my original message, and now we already have a number of messages on
>> this thread that have nothing to do with the actual issue. That’s the kind
>> of stuff that makes we very very tired participating here.
>>
>> Best
>> Jan
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> ermouth
>>>
>>> 2015-09-14 15:26 GMT+03:00 Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org>:
>>>
>>>> Of course, this could have gone this way:
>>>>
>>>> “That’s an interesting approach, is there more literature on how and why
>>>> this is supposed to work?”
>>>> “Here’s a bunch of links: …”
>>>> “Gotcha, the one thing I fear now is that people are afraid to say
>> ‘but’,
>>>> or take a contrarian position in general. How can we avoid that?”
>>>> “I think it comes back to trust, if we all trust each other, that we
>> have
>>>> the best of the project in mind, we shouldn’t have a problem disagreeing
>>>> with each other.”
>>>>
>>>> But then again, that would be a sign of the method working…
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>> Jan
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 14 Sep 2015, at 14:15, ermouth <ermo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, next good step is to write it in CoC. Something like “Starting
>> post
>>>>> with ‘But’ is unwelcomed here’. You surely attract tons of contributors
>>>>> with this.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for me the only desire after reading this is not to subscribe, but
>> to
>>>>> unsubscribe. Imposed iron ordnung is surely far more uncomfortable,
>> then
>>>>> posts, starting with ‘but‘.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also I see this policy just leave important questions undiscussed –
>>>> nobody
>>>>> dare to say ‘but’.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ermouth
>>>>>
>>>>> 2015-09-14 13:52 GMT+03:00 Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org>:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 14 Sep 2015, at 12:08, Alexander Shorin <kxe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Jan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> We agreed on a “Yes and…”-style of feedback, and it looks like that
>> we
>>>>>>>> are defaulting to a “But…”-style feedback.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could you explain what are "Yes and..." and "But..." feedback styles
>>>>>>> and how they are different?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure, I had hoped that just mentioning this recalls our previous
>>>>>> discussions. Here’s an example (sorry Michelle for picking on your
>>>> example
>>>>>> here, but it was freshest in my mind. In general, I don’t mean to
>>>> re-play
>>>>>> this as it happened on dev@, and I don’t want to single out anyone in
>>>>>> particular, so I changed things a little):
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “But…”-style:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “Hey, let’s create a design@ mailing list for designers.”
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “That’s a bad idea, we already have www@ and nobody uses that.”
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “…”
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <after a few of these, the person with the original suggestion leaves
>>>> the
>>>>>> project>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “Yes, and…”-style:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “Hey, let’s create a design@ mailing list for designers.”
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “That’s an interesting idea: safe spaces are important! We still have
>>>> the
>>>>>> somewhat dormant (which is a different discussion) www@ mailing list
>>>> for
>>>>>> website stuff, have you considered repurposing this?”
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “Ah, good call, maybe that works, but I feel www@ isn’t as inviting a
>>>>>> name as design@ is.”
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “I can understand that. If we go down that path, what would be even
>> more
>>>>>> inviting than a design@ mailing list? I can imagine that our mailing
>>>> list
>>>>>> system is not very approachable for designers to begin with, maybe we
>>>>>> should look at a Discourse instance or a Slack channel?“
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <fruitful conversation continues>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * * *
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If your read this and thing “golly, ‘But…’-style is a lot more
>>>> efficient,
>>>>>> we don’t have a lot of people contributing in the first place, so
>>>> cutting
>>>>>> these discussions short is brilliant”, just know that our #1 purpose
>> as
>>>> a
>>>>>> project must be to attract more contributors. Having more contributors
>>>> is
>>>>>> the #1 thing that makes sure CouchDB is a long-term success. It makes
>>>> sure
>>>>>> that individuals don’t burn out, it helps with more diverse ideas
>> making
>>>>>> the project better, it helps get us more stuff done overall.
>> Long-term,
>>>> it
>>>>>> doesn’t matter if 2.0 is delayed by a couple of more weeks, but it
>> does
>>>>>> matter if the people who help shipping 2.0 leave the project right
>>>> after,
>>>>>> because it was such a burden to do that they lost interest or simply
>>>> burned
>>>>>> out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * * *
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best
>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> ,,,^..^,,,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Professional Support for Apache CouchDB:
>>>>>> http://www.neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Professional Support for Apache CouchDB:
>>>> http://www.neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Professional Support for Apache CouchDB:
>> http://www.neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/
>>
>>
