Re: Rules of discourse for the mailing lists
On Wed, 15 Oct 1997, joost witteveen wrote:
> debian-unstable:For everybody who runs "unstable", and wants to
> report problems with it, possibly asking stupid questions.
> A sort-of "debian-user" for the "unstable" dist.
>
> debian-devel An open forum for asking questions about packaging
> problems, but not for possibly "silly" problems
> with hamm. Non-developpers may lurk, but are
> discoraged to post (I think a discoragement is
> enough. Most users wouldn't want annoy developpers
> and they can always post their problems on debian-unstable)
> Only people that frequently read debian-devel
> are encouraged to post here.
>
I really do like this idea, even though I am generally against "splitting"
list for any reasons, the reason for this split is to segregate two
different technical discussions to improve clarity. However, I regret to
say, that it doesn't speak to the problem of language or silly questions,
however much it might spread them out.
>
>
> [1] For the poster, it's often dificult to decide whether something is
> a "silly" question or not. But even silly questions have to be
> asked sometimes, and it's good to have an open forum for silly questions
> about unstable.
Seems to me that the real problem hear is POV (point of view). We can (and
might) discuss the parameters of a "silly" question for an indefinite
time, learning more about each other than some would care for, but leaving
the question unresolved (even though battle lines may be clearly drawn).
I'm completely certain that I could ask a "silly" question on any subject
to which you care to restrict the discussion ;-) This really can't be the
approach to the problem. Besides the discussion is about "reactive"
language in reply to "silly" questions. And, honestly I don't see how to
"force" participants to take some "particular" communication style. On the
other hand, I think it is informative and instructive that we discuss what
constitutes "polite" discourse. Having "guidelines" for such behavior
would be very useful in moderating such interactions, but it finally comes
down to what kind of environment we each want to work in and what
compromises we are willing to make to be here.
Two of the primary complaints have been "bad/fowl language" (four letter
words...What's a four letter word for intercourse?...talk) and the other
seems to boil down to "name calling". While some are willing to ban "good
natured ribbing" or "sarcastic content" because the result is often
inflamatory, I think that the ability to judge such content becomes quite
problematical.
Personally I find the "bad words" issue much easier to identify. Any one
who knows their George Carlin knows the "seven forbidden words". But
asside from "allowing" one person to offend another I, personally, don't
see a reason to "ban" such words.
Cursing, or calling others depricating names, usually only reflects poorly
on the speaker, while at best it only serves to declare the respondant's
deep frustration with the situation and the other party in the discussion.
>
> [2] Splitting mailinglist is the eternal answer to everery problem, I know.
> I realise it also very often isn't as good a solution as it may seem
> at first. But here, as there do seem to be many people that dislike
> the "silly" questions on debian-devel, I'd say splitting may indeed be
> a good solution.
>
At least it will spread the discussion of "proper behavior" over more
lists ;-)
The only way to stop an acrimonious discussion is for one side or the
other to stop talking. It doesn't always work for one side to be
reasonable if the other side insists on being obnoxious. As hard as "not
talking" can be for me ;-) I have found this to be a functional response
in recent times and encourage others to practice the "cold shoulder" as
the proper reply to antagonistic, threatening, or otherwise disruptive
discourse.
Guidelines will certianly help folks like Bruce and other list moderators
when it becomes necessary to "enforce" policy on a mailing list. I would
prefer such guidelines be proactive and affirmative rather than a list of
"thou shalt not"s but would appreciate any "reasonable" attempt at such a
document.
Waiting is,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_-_- _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (904) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: dwarf@polaris.net Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: