Dealing with off-topic mail (was Re: The role of debian-private)
Piotr Ożarowski wrote: [Christoph Berg, 2010-06-09] Too few MUAs have a button for don't bother me about new mail in this (sub-)thread. I wish all off-topic mails were marked with OT tag in the subject, dovecot moves such mails (including the ones tagged with VAC) to a different mailbox for me. How about at least sending private replies to all senders who forgot to tag their mails, just like we do with unwanted CCs? I know some people are more off-topic than I am, but I never sent a mail marked as off-topic and doubt that I will. Since I never looked at offtopic medias, I'm not in a good position to judge, but I guess few people participate there. I agree with Christoph that offtopicness is relative. I don't expect many people to send mails they'll mark as offtopic. And I don't think sending private complains to people who forgot to mark their mails offtopic will be efficient. Jurij Smakov started a discussion on message voting/scoring/rating: http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2008/12/msg00089.html Such a system could help coping with offtopic mails. The project: https://alioth.debian.org/projects/mailvoting/ Like others, it could use more manpower... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201006280239.06209.chea...@gmail.com
Re: The role of debian-private
On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 04:52:42PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: Personally I like also that debian-private carries strong personal opinion (instead of public mailing list). I don't think I'm able to interpret the above properly. If that is to mean that on -private you don't need to be respectful of others (as we are supposed to be on other public mailing list), then I firmly disagree. I'm not saying that you said that, but I think the above sentence is a bit slippery in that respect. We know each others and we know how to interpret the messages That too is an argument that I personally don't like: we don't know each other any better on -private than we do on public lists. Keep in mind that lots of DDs have never met each other in person even if they share the status of being DDs. So, please avoid making the assumption that even if you write something in a bad/emotional way, it will be taken in a good way; be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others applies pretty well to mails and can prevent tons of flames, on -private as anywhere else. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7 z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -- http://upsilon.cc/zack/ Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie sempre uno zaino ...| ..: | Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: The role of debian-private
On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 03:46:13PM +, Clint Adams wrote: On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 04:52:42PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: I don't think traffic shoudl be keep at minimun, it is not a important list. We don't hide problem, so important things are send to d-d-a (which is the only required list for DD). Why would we not be better served if the people who think that there should be an exclusive club for patently idiotic discussions went off and made a separate, unofficial mailing list for that purpose? That way both groups could be happy. As wrote by Jonas, there is a risk of cabalization. Good discussion could also start from off-topic bad threads. Anyway I must explain the purposes or my previous mail: Enrico mail was (IMO) too restrictive, specially considering that it was the first mail on project. So I think it could be mis-interpreted. I replied to enrico's mail as a stand-alone. I know from IRC and few mails on -private that it seems that some most I left unread are funny (and highly off-topic). But this was not the subject of enrico mail. So I don't want that because of chatty mails we will set a too restrictive policy. [I'm pretty indifferent to the off-topic threads, as you see, I usually just ignore most of bad sub-threads, so restrict or not such mails are indifferent to me, but the very offtopic mails did seem the original topic of enrico mail] On 10.06.2010 12:37, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 04:52:42PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: Personally I like also that debian-private carries strong personal opinion (instead of public mailing list). I don't think I'm able to interpret the above properly. If that is to mean that on -private you don't need to be respectful of others (as we are supposed to be on other public mailing list), then I firmly disagree. I'm not saying that you said that, but I think the above sentence is a bit slippery in that respect. We know each others and we know how to interpret the messages That too is an argument that I personally don't like: we don't know each other any better on -private than we do on public lists. Keep in mind that lots of DDs have never met each other in person even if they share the status of being DDs. So, please avoid making the assumption that even if you write something in a bad/emotional way, it will be taken in a good way; be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others applies pretty well to mails and can prevent tons of flames, on -private as anywhere else. The paragraph your quoted was also controversial to me. I don't like my arguments, but it seems that there are true. So I hope some other people will clarify this topic. My observations: Personal discussion (eyes-to-eyes) has so great values that list cannot even think to reach. For this reason BSPs, DebConfs and the famous keysigning+beer bilater meetings are so popular. You (Zack) are a great mediator, so you must confirm that: it is difficult to hide emotions, and some attack starts from miss-interpretation of people behaviour and people writing. People will learn about email conduct, but it take time (thus flames), and possibly one should live on the wrong side to learn about to write neutral mail and to assume good faith (no personal attack) by default on other intentions. It seems to me that new channels are gaining significance: irc and private email (especially on controversial topic). Why? I suppose (but I'm really not an expert, and not so involved in a lot of discussion, especially on last months) that being frank/open has a lot of advantage (and surely quicker) than a self-moderate public discussion. To conclude: On last DebConf there was a BOFH about the losing of debian-devel volume of mails. I fear that limiting (or better to enforce existing limits) on debian-private will not move discussion to other lists, but to private mail or simply to destroy communications. (IMO a lost) BTW an other comment about my previous mail topic: debian-private is not so private. Disclosing mail seems a good things for Debian: the violator usually (IIRC) must solve 10 or so bugs ;-) , so it is really not a place for highly secret things. ciao cate -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c10dafb.4040...@debian.org
Re: The role of debian-private
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 02:30:51PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: As wrote by Jonas, there is a risk of cabalization. Good discussion could also start from off-topic bad threads. I don't care if there's a cabal to discuss whether or not America, Hy-Brazil, Eurasia, and Scandinavia are continents or not. I don't care if there's a cabal who thinks that Maudite doesn't taste awful. I don't care if there's a cabal that thinks procreation is a good thing. None of these things need to be on -private. There are legitimate reasons to be subscribed to -private, and none of them require tolerating off-topic discussion. Good discussion would not seem to be irrelevant. If it's not meant to be secret, it shouldn't be there. I cannot imagine why this simple idea would be controvertible. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100610141610.ga22...@scru.org
Re: The role of debian-private
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 02:16:10PM +, Clint Adams wrote: On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 02:30:51PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: As wrote by Jonas, there is a risk of cabalization. Good discussion could also start from off-topic bad threads. I don't care if there's a cabal to discuss whether or not America, Hy-Brazil, Eurasia, and Scandinavia are continents or not. I don't care if there's a cabal who thinks that Maudite doesn't taste awful. I don't care if there's a cabal that thinks procreation is a good thing. None of these things need to be on -private. There are legitimate reasons to be subscribed to -private, and none of them require tolerating off-topic discussion. Good discussion would not seem to be irrelevant. If it's not meant to be secret, it shouldn't be there. I cannot imagine why this simple idea would be controvertible. Absolutely. Nobody is trying to censor these conversations, let's just have them somewere more appropriate. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com Support the Campaign for Audiovisual Free Expression: http://www.eff.org/cafe/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100610143142.gg23...@einval.com
Re: The role of debian-private
On 10.06.2010 16:16, Clint Adams wrote: On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 02:30:51PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: As wrote by Jonas, there is a risk of cabalization. Good discussion could also start from off-topic bad threads. I don't care if there's a cabal to discuss whether or not America, Hy-Brazil, Eurasia, and Scandinavia are continents or not. I don't care if there's a cabal who thinks that Maudite doesn't taste awful. I don't care if there's a cabal that thinks procreation is a good thing. None of these things need to be on -private. There are legitimate reasons to be subscribed to -private, and none of them require tolerating off-topic discussion. Good discussion would not seem to be irrelevant. If it's not meant to be secret, it shouldn't be there. I cannot imagine why this simple idea would be controvertible. ok, but again, it was not the point of this thread of debian-project. I agree with you (about some irrelevant messages), but I would like that some less important message can still be sent in debian-private, as we decided years ago (see below). There are two points about debian-private. - one about we don't hide problem and public discussion, so a lot of us care about feeling there is a cabal. and I think this was the point of enrico mail. - the second one is your point: few but more relevant messages. But we already had such discussion some (a lots) year ago. (I hope not disclosing too much informations, and anyway IIRC, thus I could be very wrong). The decision/compromise was to allow vacation messages, which are important for some people, but annoying for many other people, and surely not so important for the project (note: db has the vacation flag). But we aggreed to add the [VAC] string to such messages. So I interpret the decision as that few relevant message is not so important, especially if we can easily filter (with MUA/procmail) the (for us) irrelevant messages. So I think the procedure mark all thread as read with the few yearly hot-threads, it is an good compromise, instead of talking about new list, and *trying to enforce code of conducts (which AFAIK are not so welcome in Debian). If we agree about maintaining in debian-private VAC, health, children, exams, jobs changes, keysigning+beers, and similar in debian-private, I can fight with you against cultural/language/etc. flames of debian-private ;-) ciao cate -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c10fe98.1010...@debian.org
The role of debian-private
Hello, there is a discussion in debian-private about the role of debian-private. There is nothing private in that discussion, so I'm following it up here. So, some people are advocating in favour of a private mailing list for DD chatter. The fact that that idea is being very vocally pushed by no less than two people prompts me to double check some fundamental facts about the Debian project. So, here's how, so far, I understand things are supposed to work. We have a social contract: http://www.debian.org/social_contract where we say: We will not hide problems. This is generally taken to mean that as much as possible of Debian work and discussion ought to be public. That idea is violated, institutionally, in at least two points: - embargoed security issues, in order to be able to participate in vendor-sec; - and debian-private, which is supposed to host discussion about sensitive topics, with the understanding that private discussion should be kept to a minimum and moved to public lists as soon as it's possible to do so. My understanding is that the intention of the project is to keep these violations to as little as one possibly can, and this intention has also been reflected in the results of this GR: http://www.debian.org/vote/2005/vote_002 I used to take all of this as something obvious and well understood throughout the project. So, if someone thinks that those assumptions are wrong, I'd like to hear their reasons. Ciao, Enrico -- GPG key: 4096R/E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini enr...@enricozini.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: The role of debian-private
On 09.06.2010 16:08, Enrico Zini wrote: Hello, there is a discussion in debian-private about the role of debian-private. There is nothing private in that discussion, so I'm following it up here. So, some people are advocating in favour of a private mailing list for DD chatter. The fact that that idea is being very vocally pushed by no less than two people prompts me to double check some fundamental facts about the Debian project. So, here's how, so far, I understand things are supposed to work. We have a social contract: http://www.debian.org/social_contract where we say: We will not hide problems. This is generally taken to mean that as much as possible of Debian work and discussion ought to be public. That idea is violated, institutionally, in at least two points: - embargoed security issues, in order to be able to participate in vendor-sec; - and debian-private, which is supposed to host discussion about sensitive topics, with the understanding that private discussion should be kept to a minimum and moved to public lists as soon as it's possible to do so. My understanding is that the intention of the project is to keep these violations to as little as one possibly can, and this intention has also been reflected in the results of this GR: http://www.debian.org/vote/2005/vote_002 I used to take all of this as something obvious and well understood throughout the project. So, if someone thinks that those assumptions are wrong, I'd like to hear their reasons. Hmm. I think you are confusing secrecy with privacy. Embargoed issues should be keep secrets during some time, but anyway IIRC debian-security is not more automatically forwarded to debian-private, so I think it is not more a topic. But the most of the mail in debian-private are about privacy, not secrets so it is not IMHO a We will not hide problems. For privacy reasons we don't want to show all world about our vacation dates and destinations, about health and children, about personal issues we have with other people (in and outside Debian), etc. discussion keep to the minimum: no, we are happy to help, to congratulate, to exchange beer meetings, etc to our fellows. But still private issues, which IMHO it is not about hiding problems I don't think traffic shoudl be keep at minimun, it is not a important list. We don't hide problem, so important things are send to d-d-a (which is the only required list for DD). Personally I like also that debian-private carries strong personal opinion (instead of public mailing list). We know each others and we know how to interpret the messages (and IMHO the conclusion are inevitable pubblic, so also not hidding problems). There is less risk of forwarding a part of conversation which could give the wrong interpretation of personal opinion. With such arguments, I think we can understand better the meaning of debian-private and that there is not so important discussion in it. (Reading your mail, people could things that debian-private is an other (just joking) cabal mailing list. ciao cate -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c0faaba.10...@debian.org
Re: The role of debian-private
On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 04:52:42PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: I don't think traffic shoudl be keep at minimun, it is not a important list. We don't hide problem, so important things are send to d-d-a (which is the only required list for DD). Why would we not be better served if the people who think that there should be an exclusive club for patently idiotic discussions went off and made a separate, unofficial mailing list for that purpose? That way both groups could be happy. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100609154613.ga13...@scru.org
Re: The role of debian-private
On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 03:46:13PM +, Clint Adams wrote: On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 04:52:42PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: I don't think traffic shoudl be keep at minimun, it is not a important list. We don't hide problem, so important things are send to d-d-a (which is the only required list for DD). Why would we not be better served if the people who think that there should be an exclusive club for patently idiotic discussions went off and made a separate, unofficial mailing list for that purpose? That way both groups could be happy. They[1] already did. But that's secret. ;-) - Jonas [1] Or is it we? You will never know... -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: The role of debian-private
Re: Enrico Zini 2010-06-09 20100609140853.ga3...@enricozini.org So, some people are advocating in favour of a private mailing list for DD chatter. The fact that that idea is being very vocally pushed by no less than two people prompts me to double check some fundamental facts about the Debian project. I think the basic problem is that some threads live longer than their original subject and tend to degrade in chatter about random other topics. New mailinglists wouldn't solve that problem as the threshold for randomness is different for everyone, but some debian-offtopic list could make make sense. (I wouldn't join it.) Too few MUAs have a button for don't bother me about new mail in this (sub-)thread. Christoph -- c...@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: The role of debian-private
[Christoph Berg, 2010-06-09] Too few MUAs have a button for don't bother me about new mail in this (sub-)thread. I wish all off-topic mails were marked with OT tag in the subject, dovecot moves such mails (including the ones tagged with VAC) to a different mailbox for me. How about at least sending private replies to all senders who forgot to tag their mails, just like we do with unwanted CCs? -- Piotr Ożarowski Debian GNU/Linux Developer www.ozarowski.pl www.griffith.cc www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100609201223.gb16...@piotro.eu
Re: The role of debian-private
On Wed, 09 Jun 2010, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: [Christoph Berg, 2010-06-09] Too few MUAs have a button for don't bother me about new mail in this (sub-)thread. I wish all off-topic mails were marked with OT tag in the subject, dovecot moves such mails (including the ones tagged with VAC) to a different mailbox for me. Anything which is off-topic for -private doesn't need to be kept private, and should be moved to another list as soon as possible.[0] People who continue to post to such threads should be asked nicely to raise the subject in an appropriate mailing list and continue the discussion there. [And if the argument against moving it to the appropriate mailing list is because no one is subscribed to that mailing list, then no one cares about that topic anyway and the flogging should stop.] Don Armstrong 0: This is one of the reasons why I wish we had gone to compulsory declassification of -private for non-VAC mails, with the onus on people who want a thread to remain private to put forward the effort to redact the messages. -- It has always been Debian's philosophy in the past to stick to what makes sense, regardless of what crack the rest of the universe is smoking. -- Andrew Suffield in 20030403211305.gd29...@doc.ic.ac.uk http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100609214120.gv4...@teltox.donarmstrong.com