On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Robert Rohde <raro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Tim Starling<tstarl...@wikimedia.org> > wrote: > > Erik Moeller wrote: > >> 2009/9/8 Gregory Maxwell <gmaxw...@gmail.com>: > >>> As such, it's time to try something different. > >> > >> What do you suggest? Are there models from other mailing list > >> communities that we should experiment with to create a healthier, more > >> productive discussion culture? What, based on your own experience of > >> this list, would you like to see change? > > > > I think we should stop using this outdated technology altogether and > > instead switch to a web-based forum, where comments can be > > postmoderated (i.e. removed after posting), and unproductive threads > > can be moved or locked. > > > > Mailing lists, by their nature, have a large potential for abuse by > > trolls and spammers. It's trivial to impersonate another user, or to > > continue posting indefinitely despite being blocked. We're lucky that > > the behaviour we've seen here has been merely inconsiderate, rather > > than malicious. > > > > Discussion on the English Wikipedia continues to function despite > > hateful users who try every dirty trick they can think of to disrupt > > the community. We're lucky that foundation-l has only seen the merest > > hint of a reflection of that turmoil, because the tools we have to > > deal with abusive behaviour on mailing lists are far less capable than > > those that have been developed for Wikipedia. > > Some modern forums have features that can interact very intelligently > with email, which to my mind might be the best of both worlds. Such > things would still allow the features you mention such as thread > locking and removal of abuse from the archive, but would also allow > people to continue to receive email copies of posts if that is what > they prefer. > > For example, have a forum where people can subscribe to receive email > copies of either all posts or just specific threads of interest. Most > systems would require that you then visit the website to post replies > (which could be facilitated by including a reply url in any emailed > copy), though I do recall once seeing a forum email manager that > created a unique reply-to address for each thread/user, hence allowing > one to email replies directly onto the forum while still having those > replies be subjected to any thread and/or user specific rules that had > been put in place. > > In any event, I think we could probably set up a system that provided > more flexible control over threads and users without necessarily > sacrificing the convenience of email for people that prefer that > approach. And of course, people who don't want email interaction > could just use such a web forum as a web forum without enabling any > email features. > > -Robert Rohde > > If an enterprising hacker were to enable fully bidirectional e-mail <-> liquid threads functionality then I can see this being accepted, but otherwise it seems implausible. Despite all the benefits of forums they don't come close to the global usage habits and convenience of e-mail. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l