On Sunday, 4 March 2018 01:11:08 UTC, Yuraeitha wrote: > On Sunday, March 4, 2018 at 2:01:40 AM UTC+1, Yuraeitha wrote: > > @[799] > > Maybe we can do both and increase the overall value altogether? I'll > > understand if you don't think that is a good idea, but lets for a moment > > try see if a merged forum/github-wiki concept can work. We could make a > > sub-forum or even a whole forum section for GitHub account activity. Make a > > sticky post which is kept updated, with overview and introducing every > > GitHub content developers who are making unofficial work to Qubes. Then > > below that, everyone can post a detailed post for their GitHub page, > > listing and giving brief or detailed explanations of what it brings of > > value. Essentially it's possible to promote ones work here, so that others > > can find it. > > > > So overall, for example one forum section for guides on how to use and get > > into Qubes (i.e. new people to Qubes, and how to get started). Another > > section for work on scripts and guides with sub-forums, moving the > > scripts/guides over as they develop. And a final forum section to polish > > the scripts/guides to finish them. Then we can have a forum section for > > GitHub pages as described above, this way, people can choose the degree > > they want others to meddle in their work. For example GitHub while > > cooperative, doesn't tend to have others come in unless there is an open > > invitation there, or if the other party is rude. But on the forum here, > > it's an open invitation to come and work together on a project. This way > > one can preserve a form of individuality too, and invite others in > > naturally through the forum as a framework, if that is what is desired. The > > forum will then focus on both approaches, whether it's promoting/sharing > > work done on, or inviting on projects for work to-do. > > > > As such people can choose the style they like. Also in addition to that, > > not everyone enjoys working in groups, but some enjoys working alone (and > > that should be respected, imo). For example it may fuel energy and be > > relaxing to work alone (it can even be a way of relaxing after a long day > > at work/similar), while in contrast it would be exhausting to work with > > others. Essentially the embodiment of being introvert and extrovert, both I > > think is completely normal and none is better than the other. People who > > gain energy working with others prefer a different work-style. Nothing > > wrong with it either, it's just how people gain energy, there is nothing > > bad about either of the two. > > > > I think if we mix the approaches together, we can add value to both > > suggestions. It's also easier to have discussions for both groups, for > > example a forum for the copyright/law discussions on using other people > > work, so that we can be better informed on such matters. We can also > > highlight some kinds of works in various of different forums, wherever > > there is people willing to discuss or read, and all this can be closely > > tied to GitHub and GitHub Wiki's. What do you think of a merged approach? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Andrew > > On Saturday, March 3, 2018 at 6:25:08 AM UTC+1, Andrew David Wong wrote: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > Hash: SHA512 > > > > > > On 2018-03-02 23:16, Andrew David Wong wrote: > > > > On 2018-03-02 15:05, Yuraeitha wrote: > > > >> Some of the issues/questions addressed seems like they could be > > > >> solved quite effectively and efficiently on a highly > > > >> customize-able forum? > > > > > > > >> [...] > > > > > > > >> Thoughts about using a forum? > > > > > > > > FYI, in case you haven't seen this thread: > > > > > > > > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/qubes-users/2rqas38ncFA/discussion > > > > > > > > > > While at it, here are some other old threads where similar ideas have > > > been suggested: > > > > > > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/qubes-users/D0YuoXMe_vE/discussion > > > > > > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/qubes-users/es4q40dt1EE/discussion > > > > > > Approximately every 6-12 months since the beginning of the project, a > > > new person (including me, at one point, IIRC) suggests that there > > > should be a Qubes wiki or forum, so you'll find many more threads like > > > these if you search through the archives. :) > > > > > > - -- > > > Andrew David Wong (Axon) > > > Community Manager, Qubes OS > > > https://www.qubes-os.org > > > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > > > iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEZQ7rCYX0j3henGH1203TvDlQMDAFAlqaMZcACgkQ203TvDlQ > > > MDDD4xAAwbajnwJ/PZxzrVnmzKECGkYVQQDs90LieN1s/ewuqilNx9Cdxk8Fy9La > > > jokevIemgSB/QjqRD1zl2L0ksn/XhsOgQyWyK+RCSNWdKsvDhJtsVvh0B5SA5t4N > > > FrMzig0uUHLodl9ZOT9ltvy/nOnMBj8YcfQ2i+3yEaOFSN6hc7DkyXnPRhLbEdrK > > > pwJJxbdAkvocSu6tEL1xE86cZ1CZrBIHvrVt1oCy1QPCr5EBNUukg4JMGOygZNi2 > > > 62TF+/vv1Fe9IeJ7tu+WaZLIJQ1guLesYMISMHAvsUaAwB+vbMFUFuRhHqhiB7Ir > > > qEyrf5S24aulX/F9w8043088Wd+RA/lWG2lyXZk3w9H+Gqn2UOKnKnJRCFxBmkbE > > > O+TS3/U4pB5t/4K9oezKc9dSODEt4RZO4LSN9U0i5Ksp4q1WDJyJC7eyRnQTpDc6 > > > sQHHCi3d0kFTxDozcjCJPFTLhE3OYqBfCClMmCXlLhL1j2/N0XS9nOYWRL2foA1R > > > FLaE4lOBuoNcAQO/XTXMEd3F2XUlCKOiLCLdNCVIYyhZJSFwHqpwt8pRLRk6n2hs > > > EdiyVGQh4uyOt1rWEniPEyyb2Bx/MLSYT4iafU/3ltY7uKbzDpmaUSP+oVZd6+gj > > > 6eEpVFlDzp4kfTCFRj3a/Gx8Ail4P9/KmHp+tBVfxrWQrFi+bWs= > > > =I6G3 > > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > Those are interesting older threads indeed, it gives some good new insight. > > I apologize that I did not find them, they are indeed very useful. > > > > In regard to some of the discussions, for example in the thread you started > > back in 2016, on the concern of preserving the mailing list. I have a > > suggestion to solve that issue, instead of polarizing the different > > solutions trying to replace the other. The idea here is to combine them all > > together and make use of all of their strengths without introducing too > > many new weaknesses, similar to what is suggested above with GitHub > > users/wiki's. > > > > By replacing a forum with a link (some forums easily allow this), with a > > short warning, i.e. in the description below that it'll take the user off > > the forum to the google mailing lists. So in that essence, the forum would > > only fulfill anything not already fulfilled in the mailing-lists, as the > > mailing-list would essentially be directly integrated into the forum, > > without users on the mailing-list being forced to use the forum. This might > > solve any/most? of the concerns. Maybe I overlooked something? The > > mailing-lists can keep functioning exactly like they do now, but users of > > the forums will automatically be made aware of the mailing-lists too, and > > anything normally done in the mailing-list will not be done on the forum, > > thereby making a sharp clean purpose of either that is easy to quickly > > grasp for new users. > > > > The mailing-lists can also be hard for new users to discover from the Qubes > > website, so by having the mailing-lists integrated into a Qubes forum, it > > could make everything interconnected with the Qubes website as a starting > > point; the Qubes website, the Qubes forum, and all the mailing-lists, all > > unofficial GitHub projects, even the official GitHub projects, which could > > be made very visible and near top on the forum, and replace some of the > > forum links with direct-links, before more of the actual forum-only parts > > comes below it. The first forum section could remain as a forum to > > introduce Qubes to new users with sticky posts, but then after that we > > could put the mailing-lists segments and GitHub project forum segments. > > After that, once existing systems are fully integrated, the other forum > > segments can be put below, for example the community working on > > scripts/guides, having volunteers move them across the sub-forums in the > > segment as they develop and mature, keeping it tightly organized and easy > > to read for anyone looking. Then maybe a forum to discuss law and ethics, > > so that developers have a means to discuss the muddy water of using other > > people's work. > > > > Also anything that should be kept in focus, but happens to drown in the > > mailing-list since they can't be stickies to the top of the mailing-list, > > could instead be put in the forum where they might be more easily found. > > This could potentially lower the activity in the mailing-list a bit, but > > over time, I think it would benefit both. I believe a structure like this > > is more welcoming to new users, and thereby it might even help increase the > > mailing-list over time, since the forum is promoting the mailing-list, not > > replacing it. > > > > About the ties to Qubes itself, I believe the different options can look > > like this. (Maybe I overlooked one, anyone feel free to correct me if I > > did). > > > > 1) Qubes ownership - Official Qubes board decisions - Q-Staff day-to-day > > run. > > 2) Qubes ownership - Official Qubes board decisions - Volunteer day-to-day > > run. > > 3) Qubes ownership - Official Qubes board decisions - Q-Staff/Volunteer > > mix, day-to-day run. > > 4) Qubes ownership - Unofficial board decisions - Volunteer day-to-day run. > > 5) No Qubes ownership - Unofficial board decisions - Volunteer day-to-day > > run. > > > > I did not put in staff/staff-mix in day-to-day in option 4/5 if the forum's > > long term board decisions are not controlled by the Qubes staff. I mostly > > did that for legal reasons to protect Qubes if the forum did any > > wrong-doing or if it shines bad light on reputation, but in theory it could > > also include some staff members in the final column. Option 4) and option > > 5) might therefore be best run off-site away from the Qubes website or > > official associations. Option 4 however, serves as a commission, exactly > > like in business and business law, where Qubes retains the ownership, but > > not the control over the asset, and thereby is not responsible by its > > actions, but reputation might still affect it, so if reputation is an > > issue, where such a risk exist if it has no long-term board control. Then > > either option 1/2/3 or 5 might be better, if reputation is an important > > aspect. Option 4 is therefore not without risk, although it'd have to be > > pretty serious issues for it to link across. Still, if preferring to keep > > the forum close to the Qubes, option 1), option 2) and option 3) are > > better, but here the question is more what kind of day-to-day management to > > keep, and reputation is less an issue to run out of control, because it > > stays in the long-term board control. > > > > Personally I think option 3) is the best one, meeting every needs. It stays > > in Qubes control, and long-term board decisions of the forum is not very > > time demanding. Furthermore, by keeping an admin/primary moderator, to > > ensure everything runs smoothly, but by having volunteers help out with the > > more day-to-day work on the forum, this way everything is still tied > > together, but it minimizes a lot the work you guys have to do. For example > > if Marek or Joanna keeps the ownership of the forum as they do with other > > aspects of Qubes, and if you Andrew can keep oversight of the volunteers? > > For example moderators can also be segmented into different forums, so have > > limited responsibilities, or others who have broader responsibilities and > > act as global moderators across all the forums (not as admins though). > > > > Could something that like that work? Combining all the strengths into a > > single platform, without taking away GitHub/mailing-list, but even > > strengthening GitHub/mailing-list through the forum by promoting them, > > while the forum keeps activities that can't be done on other platforms. By > > using option 3), to minimize work done, while keeping it close to Qubes. > > Could this be seen as a win-win-win for everyone? or does it have > > drawbacks/downsides I'm not seeing? > > I forgot to take the wiki aspect fully into it too, but that too could be > integrated into the forum as well, and it also makes it much, much, much more > easy to maintain a decentralized GitHub wiki as a moderator can edit the > sticky post in the wiki forum segment, and this way the forum serves not only > as a forum, but also a as hub to all other Qubes platforms. It can also help > promote Qubes donation website over at https://opencollective.com/qubes-os# > and the other off-site webpages. Essentially the forum, I think is a very > powerful platform to increase awareness of the other platforms, while also > serving as a forum at the same time, without trying to replace what the other > platforms are doing, and then add value on its own in those areas where > forums make more sense to use.
Apologies, I don't have the bandwidth to read the full thread. I had some thought. - Qubes team probably don't have the time to spread too thin, and would prefer for us to help them on there Qubes repo - Some people invest time in documenting, but it takes time for Qubes team to validate the pull request, and sometime they may prefer to not accept the PR. I think one of these 2 options would be a first good step in the right direction: - Qubes team provides a fork of qubes-doc in another project on which community members accept PR that can then be accepted as PR upstream on the official qubes-doc, qubes team only manage the access right for the PR (?) - Someone is happy to put the effort to do option 1 and manage it (which should be limited to access right to that repo to trusted comminutity members to accept PR), as long as Qubes team agree with the approach The aim is to have as much help as possible pushed to Qubes project while filtering and nurturing the efforts. I have one concern with such proposal. A number of community proposal are sometimes not very secure (to be gentle). So ideally a layer of meta-data is added (maybe on a single index page), with the rating of the doc page. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "qubes-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qubes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to qubes-users@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-users/4f452c4a-1656-4c9b-a349-f8e0fc71e841%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
