📅 Original date posted:2016-01-21
📝 Original message:I agree with the prohibition of +1s. The core competency of those who
provide this list are moderation and technology, not managing a process
through which "involved people [indicate] whether they're for or against
it."
That is certainly an excellent function, but it can be offered by anyone
who wants to run a system for collecting and displaying those indications.
The email list itself is intended to be information rich, and such
"approval voting" is not information-rich enough in my view.
It is a shame that the moderated messages require so many steps to
retrieve. Is it possible to have the "downloadable version" from
https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev-moderation/ for each month
contain the text of the moderated emails? They do contain the subjects, so
that helps.
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 6:25 PM, xor--- via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Thursday, January 21, 2016 11:20:46 AM Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev
> wrote:
> > So, what should moderation look like from now on?
>
> The original mail which announced moderation contains this rule:
> > - Generally discouraged: [...], +1s, [...]
>
> I assume "+1s" means statements such as "I agree with doing X".
>
> Any sane procedure of deciding something includes asking the involved
> people
> whether they're for or against it.
> If there are dozens of proposals on how to solve a particular technical
> problem, how else do you want to decide it than having a vote?
> It's very strange that this is not allowed - especially if we consider that
> the Bitcoin community is in a state of constant dissent currently.
> The effect is likely that you push the actual decision-making to IRC, which
> less people have access to (since it's difficult to bear the high traffic),
> and thus form some kind of "inner circle" - which makes decisions seem even
> more as if they're being dictated.
>
> So please consider allowing people to say whether they agree with something
> something or don't.
>
>
> Other than that, thanks for the good latency of moderation, I guess you're
> doing hard work there :)
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
--
I like to provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do you need a
techie?
I own Litmocracy <http://www.litmocracy.com>; and Meme Racing
<http://www.memeracing.net>; (in alpha).
I'm the webmaster for The Voluntaryist <http://www.voluntaryist.com>; which
now accepts Bitcoin.
I also code for The Dollar Vigilante <http://dollarvigilante.com/>;.
"He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules" - Satoshi
Nakamoto
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160120/89ab35ee/attachment.html>;
Dave Scotese [ARCHIVE] /
npub15w…maru8
2023-06-07 17:48:03
in reply to nevent1q…gh3p
Author Public Key
npub15wz8j5cse6sexlw6f5q7arc5efe5hxn6kcxxyy222et8qms4u3lsemaru8Published at
2023-06-07 17:48:03Event JSON
{
"id": "262ebbd04b6fb1b9ab6dc40dc4a3c9e3e4a3b72cda0cd1a3165845777f0ae9e4",
"pubkey": "a384795310cea1937dda4d01ee8f14ca734b9a7ab60c62114a5656706e15e47f",
"created_at": 1686160083,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"443784c79bd2b729932644d0165b92b4b5b6ff7c95c51041a6be521aa013a639",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"5e4a7691492bf6b42db239cac8920f2f4fa73df92f4f1e7ef63b05e58f3ea6eb",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"9d769154ae3981ed1b1ae129497c5226ed13a094fc1d82fc60b4000e54dfeefd"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2016-01-21\n📝 Original message:I agree with the prohibition of +1s. The core competency of those who\nprovide this list are moderation and technology, not managing a process\nthrough which \"involved people [indicate] whether they're for or against\nit.\"\n\nThat is certainly an excellent function, but it can be offered by anyone\nwho wants to run a system for collecting and displaying those indications.\nThe email list itself is intended to be information rich, and such\n\"approval voting\" is not information-rich enough in my view.\n\nIt is a shame that the moderated messages require so many steps to\nretrieve. Is it possible to have the \"downloadable version\" from\nhttps://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev-moderation/ for each month\ncontain the text of the moderated emails? They do contain the subjects, so\nthat helps.\n\nOn Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 6:25 PM, xor--- via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e On Thursday, January 21, 2016 11:20:46 AM Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003e So, what should moderation look like from now on?\n\u003e\n\u003e The original mail which announced moderation contains this rule:\n\u003e \u003e - Generally discouraged: [...], +1s, [...]\n\u003e\n\u003e I assume \"+1s\" means statements such as \"I agree with doing X\".\n\u003e\n\u003e Any sane procedure of deciding something includes asking the involved\n\u003e people\n\u003e whether they're for or against it.\n\u003e If there are dozens of proposals on how to solve a particular technical\n\u003e problem, how else do you want to decide it than having a vote?\n\u003e It's very strange that this is not allowed - especially if we consider that\n\u003e the Bitcoin community is in a state of constant dissent currently.\n\u003e The effect is likely that you push the actual decision-making to IRC, which\n\u003e less people have access to (since it's difficult to bear the high traffic),\n\u003e and thus form some kind of \"inner circle\" - which makes decisions seem even\n\u003e more as if they're being dictated.\n\u003e\n\u003e So please consider allowing people to say whether they agree with something\n\u003e something or don't.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Other than that, thanks for the good latency of moderation, I guess you're\n\u003e doing hard work there :)\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\n\n-- \nI like to provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do you need a\ntechie?\nI own Litmocracy \u003chttp://www.litmocracy.com\u003e and Meme Racing\n\u003chttp://www.memeracing.net\u003e (in alpha).\nI'm the webmaster for The Voluntaryist \u003chttp://www.voluntaryist.com\u003e which\nnow accepts Bitcoin.\nI also code for The Dollar Vigilante \u003chttp://dollarvigilante.com/\u003e.\n\"He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules\" - Satoshi\nNakamoto\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160120/89ab35ee/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "0a49c4c84def34bf988f1e528c89ee362cc46b097e03284c3c8f2a19cd7f38de7bfd8c5c50d5bf82262f567136b091a67f929f307eb1b7412953bb95f846a93d"
}