"Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <hk...@gentoo.org> posted 4a02a0e7.5050...@gentoo.org, excerpted below, on Thu, 07 May 2009 10:50:47 +0200:
> Duncan wrote: >> Plus, as I said, with a pre-arrangement, it's possible to do email >> reasonably close to real-time as well, close enough they'd not have >> time to look it up unless they had /some/ idea what was going on. > > What good is simulating real-time chat with email? No simulation, simply ping-ponging close enough to real time via email that there's no need for IRC. > If you prefer not to use IRC most of the time, fine. Refusing to use IRC > when it is clearly the superior tool, that's just dumb. So then I guess > you are arguing email is better for this, right? Not better, but different, and comparable enough that it's not worth losing a potentially valuable contributor over the difference. Some people have just never felt comfortable with IRC, others find it indispensible. Different strokes for different folks as they say, certainly not something worth losing a dev over. True, it works both ways to some degree, but when it's volunteers you are working with, and there's any number of other projects they could be contributing to instead, if one requires something they're not comfortable with, that one likely lost out for what's long term view something ridiculously trivial. > What's so bad about the real-time nature of IRC anyways? That's just > like having a genuine face-to-face conversation. Are those bad too? To > be avoided at all costs? What problem are we solving here again? Nothing bad about it. Some folks are just more comfortable using other comms methods. <sigh> I hadn't intended to get personal, simply state an opinion and clarify a position, but perhaps some personal specifics will help. Or maybe they won't, but WTH, it's worth the effort... Unlike "the texting generation"[1], I've simply found I don't do well with instant text. I deliberate over my sentences too much, go back and rewrite, occasionally lookup words I'm using to ensure the meaning or spelling is correct, etc. In a one-on-one, the other end ends up sitting there staring at a blank screen for minutes at a time, then replies in seconds. That's a waste of their time and a discomfort to me, as I realize the mismatch. In a many-to-many, unlike say a dozen separate voice conversations in a crowded room, I simply don't have the skill others have obviously perfected of separating out the individual desired threads from the "noise" in real-time, tho I can of course with a bit of effort "pore over"[2] an IRC log and regenerate the conversation virtually, after the fact, as I regularly do with the council meeting logs, for instance. But real-time text in pretty much any form simply doesn't work well for me, and I'm uncomfortable with it as a result. Sure, given time and effort that would likely change, to some degree, but honestly, there's far better yields for the same time and effort elsewhere. Obviously, it's not something the texting generation can easily understand, thus this discussion. I've seen a few replies from the (rare) Gentoo dev as well, indicating they basically don't do IRC either, just mail, tho it is quite rare, and it would seem, likely to go extinct in Gentoo before its time, since evidently those devs have no skills considered worth recruiting any more. I'd call that a shame as that's a potentially large skills and talent bank Gentoo's about to pass on, but what's a man to do, other than make the point as best he can? <shrug> [1] "The texting generation": loosely described, not necessarily a specific generation, more a level of comfort with a specific form of technology, tho it's presumably more common in say the under-30 crowd than the over-40, even among developers and the otherwise technically literate. [2] "Pore over": lookup case in point. FWIW I had it right, "pore not pour". =:^) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
