On Sat Dec 20 14:52, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 08:31:34PM +, Matthew Johnson wrote:
I assume any final proposal would explicitly amend the SC/constitution
to state this. In fact, I'm tempted to say that _all_ of these should
include SC/Constitution amendments to make
Hi,
It is generally perceived that there are currently a couple of
problems with the way discussions happen on our mailing lists:
* Some people are put off from participating in the discussions
on important topics because they are not willing to expose themselves
to offensive behaviour and
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 05:08:57PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
The social contract is supposedly a contract.
The Social Contract is not a contract (even though it is called that - but I
believe the name is an intentional reference to a famous concept in political
philosophy). A
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
It is generally perceived that there are currently a couple of
problems with the way discussions happen on our mailing lists:
I'm not sure yet if I like the idea, but for sure it is an intriguing
one, thanks for pushing it through!
Hello,
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008, Jurij Smakov wrote:
and so on. The way I would like to see this idea developing is that it
starts as an unofficial project, with very simple rules (like, you
can vote once for each message ID), which simply collects the data
and makes it publicly available in
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 10:35:14 +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
I believe that at this point Nick Rusnov, John Goerzen and myself have
expressed interest in working on the first stage of the project. If
you have any ideas or comments - please share, we would also welcome
your contribution if you
[ re-ordering the quoted text, anticipating your reply to my post ]
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 04:35:43PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
The goal is not (necessarily to) filter the messages that we want to
see or not, the goal is to give feedback to contributors so that
they know if their messages
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
[ re-ordering the quoted text, anticipating your reply to my post ]
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 04:35:43PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
The goal is not (necessarily to) filter the messages that we want to
see or not, the goal is to give feedback
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I like the idea of clarifying what the principles of the project
actually are, since, as aj said, all the decisions about lenny would
fall out from the position the project take about the foundation
documents. While I have always thought that foundation implied the
Raphael Hertzog (2008-12-20 17:41 +0100) wrote:
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
seemed to be more oriented to scoring single posts, while here you
are kind of inheriting a score on the poster from his posts. They are
two quite different approaches.
They are different but if
Le Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 07:12:15PM +0200, Teemu Likonen a écrit :
Maybe even add an additional header to mailing-list posts, like
X-Debian-Author-Karma: +234. OK, maybe not. It's not terribly reliable
on public mailing lists because users can change their From addresses as
they want. But at
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 05:02:23PM +0100, David Paleino wrote:
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 10:35:14 +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
I believe that at this point Nick Rusnov, John Goerzen and myself have
expressed interest in working on the first stage of the project. If
you have any ideas or
Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org writes:
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
It is generally perceived that there are currently a couple of
problems with the way discussions happen on our mailing lists:
I'm not sure yet if I like the idea, but for sure it is an
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 08:23:27AM +, Matthew Johnson wrote:
If this vote is 1:1 then there's no point in the 3:1 requirement since
you can just ignore them with a 1:1 vote. When we (using the term
loosely, since it doesn't include me) voted in the constitution, surely
the 3:1 requirement
Jurij Smakov ju...@wooyd.org wrote: [...]
So, what can we do about? During a little brainstorming session on IRC
last night a following idea has emerged: let's have a way to express
our opinion about the mailing list posts. [...]
So, people who remain on the debian mailing lists have a poor
On Saturday 20 December 2008 21:33:27 MJ Ray wrote:
Jurij Smakov ju...@wooyd.org wrote: [...]
So, what can we do about? During a little brainstorming session on IRC
last night a following idea has emerged: let's have a way to express
our opinion about the mailing list posts. [...]
So,
* MJ Ray:
Jurij Smakov ju...@wooyd.org wrote: [...]
So, what can we do about? During a little brainstorming session on IRC
last night a following idea has emerged: let's have a way to express
our opinion about the mailing list posts. [...]
So, people who remain on the debian mailing lists
Florian Weimer f...@deneb.enyo.de writes:
* MJ Ray:
Jurij Smakov ju...@wooyd.org wrote: [...]
So, what can we do about? During a little brainstorming session on IRC
last night a following idea has emerged: let's have a way to express
our opinion about the mailing list posts. [...]
So,
George Danchev danc...@spnet.net writes:
On Saturday 20 December 2008 21:33:27 MJ Ray wrote:
So, people who remain on the debian mailing lists have a poor
understanding of what should appear a good mailing list,
What makes you think that vocal minority is larger than silent
majority in
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 09:38:56AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
George Danchev danc...@spnet.net writes:
On Saturday 20 December 2008 21:33:27 MJ Ray wrote:
So, people who remain on the debian mailing lists have a poor
understanding of what should appear a good mailing list,
What makes
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
* Vocal minority dominates silent majority by contributing a
disproportionate amount of list traffic, [...]
Note that voting can have a similar drawback -- in that if you've got
enough like-minded people voting for a particular
On Sunday 21 December 2008 03:49:44 Anthony Towns wrote:
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
* Vocal minority dominates silent majority by contributing a
disproportionate amount of list traffic, [...]
Note that voting can have a similar drawback -- in that if
22 matches
Mail list logo
