MESSAGE
| DATE | 2019-11-05 |
| FROM | Alexandre =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois?= Garreau
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] list moderation
|
From hangout-bounces-at-nylxs.com Tue Nov 5 12:24:21 2019
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: archive-at-mrbrklyn.com
Delivered-To: archive-at-mrbrklyn.com
Received: from www2.mrbrklyn.com (www2.mrbrklyn.com [96.57.23.82])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB104163F5F;
Tue, 5 Nov 2019 12:24:20 -0500 (EST)
X-Original-To: hangout-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com
Delivered-To: hangout-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com
Received: by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 43771163F54; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 12:24:12 -0500 (EST)
Resent-From: Ruben Safir
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 12:24:12 -0500
Resent-Message-ID: <20191105172412.GE16573-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com>
Resent-To: hangout-at-mrbrklyn.com
X-Original-To: ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com
Delivered-To: ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com
Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B882D161132
for ; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 11:50:49 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost ([::1]:46342 helo=lists1p.gnu.org)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
(envelope-from )
id 1iS22Z-0004to-Fz
for ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 11:50:47 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33416)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
(envelope-from ) id 1iS22V-0004tS-BL
for gnu-misc-discuss-at-gnu.org; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 11:50:44 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
(envelope-from ) id 1iS22T-0002xi-Jn
for gnu-misc-discuss-at-gnu.org; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 11:50:42 -0500
Received: from portable.galex-713.eu ([2a00:5884:8305::1]:53792
helo=galex-713.eu)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from )
id 1iS22R-0002wt-TN; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 11:50:40 -0500
Received: from gal by galex-713.eu with local (Exim 4.92)
(envelope-from )
id 1iS22O-00039v-6R; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 17:50:36 +0100
From: Alexandre =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois?= Garreau
To: ludo-at-gnu.org
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 17:50:35 +0100
Message-ID: <2004187.XYXmrfodIV-at-pc-713>
In-Reply-To: <87ftj2612x.fsf-at-gnu.org>
References: <87o8xsan5b.fsf-at-gnu.org> <87eeyozltf.fsf-at-gnu.org>
<87ftj2612x.fsf-at-gnu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not
recognized.
X-Received-From: 2a00:5884:8305::1
X-BeenThere: gnu-misc-discuss-at-gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
X-UID: 63558
Cc: gnu-misc-discuss-at-gnu.org
Subject: Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] list moderation
X-BeenThere: hangout-at-nylxs.com
List-Id: NYLXS Tech Talk and Politics
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Errors-To: hangout-bounces-at-nylxs.com
Sender: "Hangout"
Le mardi 5 novembre 2019, 11:59:18 CET Ludovic Court=C3=A8s a =C3=A9crit :
> silenced the rest of us.
How=E2=80=99s that? Pre-moderation were off, afaiu.
Also, what likely best silenced some people is likely the previous hours an=
d =
timezones and the sleep that commonly occurs for them during them.
> In [24 hours] we got ~100 messages, the majority of which were written by
> the same 3 people.
Cannot we have long discussions on details (that will interest a few) if we =
dare? most of it was nitpicking trying to make people realize the outcoming=
of =
their languages, and let=E2=80=99s recall ~100 message absolutely doesn=E2=
=80=99t mean ~100 =
messages going the same direction=E2=80=A6 actually, it=E2=80=99s pretty mu=
ch the opposite: a =
high amount of messages in a short time is much more likely to represent =
opposing and differing views in a (possibly constructive and enriching) deb=
ate =
or arguing.
Furthermore, as said, it was by night in Europe. Not all can be active by =
the =
same timezone. Reasoning by times as short as 24 hours on an such =
international list (and containing people not running by the same sleeptime=
s =
as most people) is not really relevant, maybe even meaningless.
Note also all these messages were (as it is common with subject deviations)=
in =
the same sub-sub[-etc.]-threads. With subject changing. So it=E2=80=99s e=
asy to fold =
and ignore with most MUAs=E2=80=A6 While it=E2=80=99s much less easy for m=
ost people to =
automatize counting of messages number and different people number who were =
emitting them (with a commonly said =E2=80=9Cuser-friendly=E2=80=9D MUA, as=
the KMail I=E2=80=99m =
currently using (be Gnus config back quickly)).
> Worse, many of those messages were personal attacks,
Only the first messages were personal attacks (against all sides, actually)=
. =
Hence, this issue is totally separate from the quantity of message, and you=
=E2=80=99re =
misrepresenting things by presenting facts grouped that way without relatio=
ns. =
Putting the accent on the quantity of messages, you=E2=80=99re even putting=
in =
question that, proportionally =E2=80=9Cmany=E2=80=9D were attacks, there we=
re maybe a few =
indeed.
Also note that=E2=80=99s why it made so much messages going forth in respon=
se for such =
behavior. To hatred, attacks, defamation, accusations, etc. I prefer posit=
ive =
reaction (explanation, discussion, learning and mutual understanding) rathe=
r =
than to negative ones (censorship, moderation). Not all agree, though.
> and many others were off-topic for this list.
Define topic then. You could say =E2=80=9CGNU=E2=80=9D, but then, let=E2=
=80=99s add =E2=80=9CGNU governance=E2=80=9D =
then =E2=80=9CGNU governance people=E2=80=9D then =E2=80=9CGNU governance c=
urrent chief=E2=80=9D then =E2=80=9CGNU =
governance current chief attacks=E2=80=9D then =E2=80=9CGNU governance curr=
ent chief attack =
response=E2=80=9D (which was personal attack). So I guess until then every=
thing is =
univoquely on-topic. But then, if you say something as =E2=80=9Cthis is an=
attack / =
insult=E2=80=9D, =E2=80=9Cattacks / insult should not be done=E2=80=9D it d=
oesn=E2=80=99t really regards GNU, =
does it? or maybe *the later* does because it regards =E2=80=9CGNU lists k=
indness =
objectives=E2=80=9D=E2=80=A6 but then the former doesn=E2=80=99t, and also =
discussion about =E2=80=9Cwhat is =
an insult / attack=E2=80=9D is off-topic=E2=80=A6
But, when discussing about anything on-topic, we might use tools=E2=80=A6 s=
uch as =
softwares, but also language, expressions, words=E2=80=A6 some might be ins=
ulting, =
attacking, etc. But however, if any tool we use (including words and their =
meaning, definitions) for anything on-topic lacks a central and connected p=
lace =
for discussing (for instance a collective dictionary that would define most =
terms and whose definitions would be voted on and modified by users (most =
dictionaries don=E2=80=99t agree this and even wiktionary actually follows =
the =
former)), isn=E2=80=99t it useful to discuss its internal (and definitions)=
in the same =
place? hence doing sometimes off-topic discussions?
I=E2=80=99ve not seen *one* message concerning what=E2=80=99s topic. I ten=
d to keep stuff =
public whenever possible so people can know, participate, answer if they =
believe we talked of them or of something or some behavior concerning them, =
but would have gladly moved the ~100 messages off-list if any did
_______________________________________________
Hangout mailing list
Hangout-at-nylxs.com
http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout
|
|
