in reply to Re^5: Moderation of Open Source projects
in thread Moderation of Open Source projects

I did not specify the circumstances when the third party moderation should be brought in - I agree that it's all matter of weighting the benefits and the work required to do it right. But I don't agree that the constant email flamewars are the best of the possible communication and I would expect that the mere possibility of this mediation would inspire people to cool down and think a bit more broadly.

Once again I don't say that TPF should have "the right to come in and throw their weight around" - but rather I say that project leaders should have the possibility of inviting a third party moderator when they need to.

Community is about having things in common - it can be a volunteer community - but that does not mean that there is no place for negotiation.

And shouting at me with your big fonts does not add any validity to your straw man arguments.

  • Comment on Re^6: Moderation of Open Source projects

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: Moderation of Open Source projects
by stvn (Monsignor) on Feb 07, 2008 at 03:44 UTC
    But I don't agree that the constant email flamewars are the best of the possible communication

    Nor do I, but honestly the perl community has largely outgrown flamewars, as has much of the OSS communities out there too. Yes, some of this still goes on in some of the basic "user help" mailing lists and IRC channels, and the occasional trolls break on through, but it you ask intelligent questions and are willing to work for your answers, there is plenty of places you can go where you will find flamewars are almost non-existent.

    However, this does not mean there is no possibility for heated discussions or reasonable people to get annoyed with other reasonable people. These things happen, people get upset and then things calm down and people go back to their daily business. Any time you have 2 or more people together the possibility exists for disagreement and conflict, thats just human nature.

    I would expect that the mere possibility of this mediation would inspire people to cool down and think a bit more broadly.

    I think you could not be more wrong here. If a project leader were to bring in mediators for every disagreement, things would never get solved and people would just elsewhere, it would not be worth the trouble. Even if they only brought someone in occasionally, it could discourage some people from joining the community, because they knew any controversial ideas that they might have would be too much trouble to propose. I think that the "mere possibility of this mediation" would be a shadow over the community which could eventually be it's downfall.

    Community is about having things in common - it can be a volunteer community - but that does not mean that there is no place for negotiation.

    Who said anything about no negotiations? We are talking about bringing in 3rd party moderators here. My point (which obviously does not seem to be getting through) is that reasonable and mature adults should be able to negotiate between themselves and not need that 3rd party.

    And shouting at me with your big fonts does not add any validity to your straw man arguments.

    First of all, I wasn't shouting, that IS WHEN YOU TYPE IN ALL CAPS, what I did was just typographical flourish ;)

    Secondly, if you want to start throwing the "straw man" thing around, then I might as well just invoke the Nazis and kill this thread right now, cause honestly I don't really have the patience for this anymore. I suspect you whole problem is that you simply don't listen well, which is why you got into the argument you go into which caused you to write these meditations. But really, I must get back to building my straw man nazi army if I am going to take over the internet before the world ends in 2038!

    -stvn

      If you think the age of flamewars is long over, look back to 2007-11, when OS Wars returned to perl5-porters. I would have imagined people there to know at least a bit about operating systems other than Unix and how they are used, but such knowledge is obviously less widespread than I believe. But then again, I wonder about the myths being spread about Windows too, and they are spread by people developing for that platform.

      You are right that an argument similar to this one caused me to write this meditation - and more accurately the fact that people start using "typographical flourish" or other pure rhetorics (like suggesting that I am immature just for thinking about possible ways to improve communication in projects) to force their points. This destroys the conversation, it polarizes and it closes people ears.

      I don't agree with the way you are argumenting but I really appreciate your critics and this conversation is important for me.

        Okay, while the glue on my straw men is drying I thought I would make one quick comment.

        ... or other pure rhetorics (like suggesting that I am immature just for thinking about possible ways to improve communication in projects) ...

        I never meant to imply that you were the immature party in these discussions. A mature discussion requires mature people, and I have seen it time and again when just a single troll enters the discussion and what are otherwise very reasonable and mature people get sucked in by the troll-bait and it all spirals down from there.

        And really I am not objecting to your desire to improve the communications in projects, only your proposed blanket solutions.

        -stvn