On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 8:06 PM, Dave F. wrote:
> Have you not noticed how your posts are becoming repetitious?
If by that you mean, "Thanks Steve for your insights on moderation, I
think you have now clearly communicated your point of view", then,
good, I'll stop.
If it was just a cheap shot, t
On 25/08/2010 07:45, Steve Bennett wrote:
Not at all. Personal attacks, repetition, off-topic remarks,
spamminess, me-tooism - none of this comes under "issues of all
natures". Picture the "town hall meeting" style that has become
popular in politics. Questions on almost any topic are allowed,
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Chris Browet wrote:
> You realize "tightly moderate" and "issues of all nature" are somewhat
> contradictory, do you?
Not at all. Personal attacks, repetition, off-topic remarks,
spamminess, me-tooism - none of this comes under "issues of all
natures". Picture the
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 05:21, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Chris Browet wrote:
> > But every opinions should have a place to voice themselves, shouldn't
> they?
>
> No. Not all opinions are helpful. And certainly, sheer volume of
> opinions is unhelpful.
>
Pfff... Ok
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Chris Browet wrote:
> But every opinions should have a place to voice themselves, shouldn't they?
No. Not all opinions are helpful. And certainly, sheer volume of
opinions is unhelpful.
> If Talk becomes moderated/censured, where would that be?
> Wouldn't it bet
This thread should be moved to legal. I saw the words "ODbL" and
"Contributor Terms" :-)
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 12:01:02PM +0100, 80n wrote:
> The license change is the biggest single issue facing OSM at this time.
> There are frequently complaints that people have not been aware that it was
> happening. Shunting it off to legal-talk@ could be construed as a way of
> helping the proc
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 12:36:18PM +0200, Chris Browet wrote:
> Is this moderating stuff all about the license change?
No, that’s just the current example.
> If so, and I know others agree, it should certainly NOT be moderated on
> Talk.
I disagree. (Although, seeing as there is call for an unm
Am 20.08.2010 12:36, schrieb Chris Browet:
Do you honestly think the Nearmap announcement should have been posted
to Legal, with only a fraction of OSM'ers aware? I don't think so.
Not the announcement but the discussion, I think.
Peter
___
talk mai
Simon
The license change is the biggest single issue facing OSM at this time.
There are frequently complaints that people have not been aware that it was
happening. Shunting it off to legal-talk@ could be construed as a way of
helping the process to happen by stealth and attrition.
For the change
> Most of the topic‐focused lists are sane. I think the point is, legal
> discussion is swamping the talk list, and there are already lists
> specifically for legal discussion and therefore better suited to the
> topic.
>
Is this moderating stuff all about the license change?
If so, and I know o
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 11:52:04AM +0200, Chris Browet wrote:
> If Talk becomes moderated/censured, where would that be?
> Wouldn't it better to create specific, on-topic moderated lists (and
> moderate the existing ones) rather than moderating "Talk", whose topic is
> not obvious?
>
> Then people
> A well-moderated list can be a valuable forum for achieving consensus,
> rather than just a soapbox for every opinion to be voiced.
>
> But every opinions should have a place to voice themselves, shouldn't they?
If Talk becomes moderated/censured, where would that be?
Wouldn't it better to creat
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Ed Avis wrote:
> We haven't had any problems before the controversy over licences, and I expect
> that once these troubles are resolved one way or another, there won't be
> further
> eruptions. So I'd suggest not setting up any elaborate moderation mechanism
> un
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 10:28 PM, Ed Avis wrote:
> We haven't had any problems before the controversy over licences, and I
> expect
> that once these troubles are resolved one way or another, there won't be
> further
> eruptions. So I'd suggest not setting up any elaborate moderation
> mechanism
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 2:34 AM, SteveC wrote:
> The list has become sane again, and I've not had to use any Evil Powers.
>
> But, is this what you want going forward?
>
> My own inclination is that list moderators are elected per list for, say, a
> one year period. But I suspect that finding peo
We haven't had any problems before the controversy over licences, and I expect
that once these troubles are resolved one way or another, there won't be further
eruptions. So I'd suggest not setting up any elaborate moderation mechanism
until it is proved to be necessary.
--
Ed Avis
__
The list has become sane again, and I've not had to use any Evil Powers.
But, is this what you want going forward?
My own inclination is that list moderators are elected per list for, say, a one
year period. But I suspect that finding people who want to be a moderator might
be hard.
Thoughts?
18 matches
Mail list logo