Re: signal-to-noise on d-d-l

[Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org>]

<quote who="Luis Villa">

> > Not over more lists -> we shift the 'global' discussion to
> > gnome-hackers, and let d-d-l stay on-topic for desktop issues. It makes
> > no sense that the general development list in "The GNOME Project" is
> > d-d-l.
> 
> Given that GNOME is a desktop, yeah, it sort of does. I'm not sure how you
> draw a line between the two for the kinds of things that have been causing
> so much wasted bandwidth, like flags (required for a desktop module), evo,
> or scripting. 

GNOME is bigger than just the Desktop release.

> > It also means that if you want to be involved in decision making in a
> > certain area of the project, you have to be involved in the list,
> > instead of getting an end run around everyone simply by being on the
> > cool kids list.
> 
> Eh?

Desktop issues -> d-d-l. Global issues -> g-h. If we remove some of the
'power' of d-d-l, then the "oddballs" won't feel like it's such a great
platform for their crack. Right now, d-d-l is basically a general entry into
all things GNOME, but if you separate out some of the issues, you have a
better opportunity to keep the lists sane and on-topic.

> > PLEASE let's not use a technical solution to a social problem.
> 
> I don't consider this a technical solution- it's a
> trust/relationship-based solution, as opposed to 'anyone who can operate
> mailman is qualified to comment on GNOME', which is the current state of
> things.

You're proposing to place an artificial, technical barrier in front of ALL
potential contributors, positive and negative. (cont'd)

> > If someone is posting regularly to a major project list, and only
> > providing useless noise, TELL THEM privately, and if they persist, TELL
> > THEM publically.
> 
> We've done that to several people lately, with no discernable effect.

I haven't seen a lot public shaming recently, anyway: If someone is being a
serious pain in the arse, you can simply moderate *them*, instead of harming
everyone's potential contributions.

A sane trust/relationship based solution is in the minds of the people
approaching the list, not in the ability to be centrally selective. That is
what killed gnome-hackers and gave rise to random gimps on d-d-l -> hackers
is centrally selective.

> So... why hasn't 'regular' social pressure worked?

Because we haven't encouraged guidelines by which to inflict social
pressure. See my previous commentary about gnome-gui-list and usability
list from way back - basically, if you don't set and state the standard, no
one will care or know. So let's set some standards and solve this with a
sniper's rifle instead of a hydrogen bomb.

- Jeff

-- 
GVADEC 2004: Kristiansand, Norway                    http://2004.guadec.org/
 
   "The most beautiful things about the world are deer and bunnies. Even
   in a carnivorous way I like them, they are my favourite meats. When I
      see them together I feel that is a safe place." - Vincent Gallo