Re: [Evolution] The system of levels, badges and presents of Discourse

[Ralf Mardorf <silver bullet zoho com>]

On Sun, 2022-10-23 at 09:48 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote:
> I wrote:
> > There even isn't the need to moderate or ban users with unwanted
> > opinions, since the users are educated by levels, badges and
> > presents.
>
> That's neither logical nor based on a correct assumption. It's not
> about "banning users with unwanted opinions" but about Code of
> Conduct.

Hi,

it isn't a CoC that we can't send a support request before we reached
Level 1 and got our first present, without offending anything at all.

We probably can join the gift of Level 1 by adding a few "Like it, thumb
up, 5 of 5 stars" to some GNOME-ish oddities that more or less nobody
likes. This is the whole point of a social credit system, well, there
are other odd points this gamification does introduce, so it's at least
one of the points this system is about.

It isn't a code of conduct that those who joined the gift of Level 1,
soon reach the maximum number of replies and need to wait a day before
they can continue. The correct term is "despotism".

You are comparing oranges with bananas.

If somebody does violate the real CoC of this mailing list, maybe by
continuously calling other subscribers names, the user gets banned from
this mailing list, but not from the Gimp or any other GNOME related
mailing list. We generally do this in our societies. If somebody gets
barred for shop theft by one food shop, this person is still allowed to
buy food in another shop, hence there is no need steel the food
purchases from grannies in the streets. In a free and social society
this approach makes a lot of sense.

In my hometown I'm allowed to write an email to the mayors without
gaining a "Level" and while all food shops are under the German law,
they all are still individual food shops allowed to make individual
decision. This is like the difference between individual mailing lists
for individual parts of the GNOME project and one forum for everything.

My claims make a lot of sense and you are aware of it, hence I will not
continue to argue.

Regards,
Ralf