1 Year bitcoin-dev Moderation Review

1 Year bitcoin-dev Moderation Review
2016-10-09 20:31 ` Ryan Grant
  2016-10-10  7:38 ` Henning Kopp
  
From: Jeremy @ 2016-10-09 10:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bitcoin development mailing list;  bitcoin-discuss

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2308 bytes --]

Hi bitcoin-dev,

I'm well aware that discussion of moderation on bitcoin-dev is
discouraged*. However, I think that we should, as a year of moderation
approaches, discuss openly as a community what the impact of such policy
has been. Making such a post now is timely given that people will have the
opportunity to discuss in-person as well as online as Scaling Bitcoin is
currently underway. On the suggestion of others, I've also CC'd
bitcoin-discuss on this message.

Below, I'll share some of my own personal thoughts as a starter, but would
love to hear others feelings as well.

For me, the bitcoin-dev mailing list was a place where I started
frequenting to learn a lot about bitcoin and the development process and
interact with the community. Since moderation has begun, it seems that the
messages/day has dropped drastically. This may be a nice outcome overall
for our sanity, but I think that it has on the whole made the community
less accessible. I've heard from people (a > 1 number, myself included)
that they now self-censor because they think they will put a lot of work
into their email only for it to get moderated away as trolling/spam. Thus,
while we may not observe a high rate of moderated posts, it does mean the
"chilling effect" of moderation still manifests -- I think that people not
writing emails because they think it may be moderated reduces the rate of
people writing emails which is a generally valuable thing as it offers
people a vehicle through which they try to think through and communicate
their ideas in detail.

Overall, I think that at the time that moderation was added to the list, it
was probably the right thing to do. We're in a different place as a
community now, so I feel we should attempt to open up this valuable
communication channel once again. My sentiment is that we enacted
moderation to protect a resource that we all felt was valuable, but in the
process, the value of the list was damaged, but not irreparably so.

Best,

Jeremy


* From the email introducing the bitcoin-dev moderation policy, "Generally
discouraged: shower thoughts, wild speculation, jokes, +1s, non-technical
bitcoin issues, rehashing settled topics without new data, moderation
 concerns."


--
@JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
<https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4803 bytes --]

 permalink raw reply	[|nested]
2016-10-09 10:26 [bitcoin-dev] 1 Year bitcoin-dev Moderation Review Jeremy

  2016-10-10  7:38 ` Henning Kopp
  
From: Ryan Grant @ 2016-10-09 20:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jeremy, Bitcoin Protocol Discussion;  Bitcoin Discuss

Maybe bitcoin-discuss should have been opt-out rather than opt-in.

Dear moderators, what is the subscription count to bitcoin-discuss,
and bitcoin-dev?


 permalink raw reply	[|nested]
2016-10-09 10:26 [bitcoin-dev] 1 Year bitcoin-dev Moderation Review Jeremy
  2016-10-09 20:31 ` Ryan Grant

  2016-10-10 15:34   ` Dave Scotese
  
From: Henning Kopp @ 2016-10-10  7:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jeremy, Bitcoin Protocol Discussion;  bitcoin-discuss

Hi all,

I totally agree with the assessment of the situation. Previously I
learned a lot about bitcoin on this list. There were a lot of great
ideas regarding the protocol and the surrounding ecosystem. Now there
is mainly talk about code and BIPs, which is the main purpose of a
developer list.
I do not feel that we should clog bitcoin-dev again with
non-development talk but rather find a way to get bitcoin-discuss
going. My impression is that bitcoin-discuss has not reached a
critical mass of contributors. The question is how we can change that.

All the best
Henning

On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 12:26:07PM +0200, Jeremy via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Hi bitcoin-dev,
> 
> I'm well aware that discussion of moderation on bitcoin-dev is
> discouraged*. However, I think that we should, as a year of moderation
> approaches, discuss openly as a community what the impact of such policy
> has been. Making such a post now is timely given that people will have the
> opportunity to discuss in-person as well as online as Scaling Bitcoin is
> currently underway. On the suggestion of others, I've also CC'd
> bitcoin-discuss on this message.
> 
> Below, I'll share some of my own personal thoughts as a starter, but would
> love to hear others feelings as well.
> 
> For me, the bitcoin-dev mailing list was a place where I started
> frequenting to learn a lot about bitcoin and the development process and
> interact with the community. Since moderation has begun, it seems that the
> messages/day has dropped drastically. This may be a nice outcome overall
> for our sanity, but I think that it has on the whole made the community
> less accessible. I've heard from people (a > 1 number, myself included)
> that they now self-censor because they think they will put a lot of work
> into their email only for it to get moderated away as trolling/spam. Thus,
> while we may not observe a high rate of moderated posts, it does mean the
> "chilling effect" of moderation still manifests -- I think that people not
> writing emails because they think it may be moderated reduces the rate of
> people writing emails which is a generally valuable thing as it offers
> people a vehicle through which they try to think through and communicate
> their ideas in detail.
> 
> Overall, I think that at the time that moderation was added to the list, it
> was probably the right thing to do. We're in a different place as a
> community now, so I feel we should attempt to open up this valuable
> communication channel once again. My sentiment is that we enacted
> moderation to protect a resource that we all felt was valuable, but in the
> process, the value of the list was damaged, but not irreparably so.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Jeremy
> 
> 
> * From the email introducing the bitcoin-dev moderation policy, "Generally
> discouraged: shower thoughts, wild speculation, jokes, +1s, non-technical
> bitcoin issues, rehashing settled topics without new data, moderation
>  concerns."
> 
> 
> --
> @JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
> <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>

> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


-- 
Henning Kopp
Institute of Distributed Systems
Ulm University, Germany

Office: O27 - 3402
Phone: +49 731 50-24138
Web: http://www.uni-ulm.de/in/vs/~kopp


 permalink raw reply	[|nested]
2016-10-10  7:38 ` Henning Kopp

  
From: Dave Scotese @ 2016-10-10 15:34 UTC ( / )
  To: Henning Kopp, Bitcoin Protocol Discussion;  Bitcoin Discuss



I sent my previous email ONLY to bitcoin-discuss@lists•linuxfoundation.org
and it waited in the moderation queue.  I don't know when moderation was
added to this list, but it seems to me that it's a misstep.

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:38 AM, Henning Kopp via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I totally agree with the assessment of the situation. Previously I
> learned a lot about bitcoin on this list. There were a lot of great
> ideas regarding the protocol and the surrounding ecosystem. Now there
> is mainly talk about code and BIPs, which is the main purpose of a
> developer list.
> I do not feel that we should clog bitcoin-dev again with
> non-development talk but rather find a way to get bitcoin-discuss
> going. My impression is that bitcoin-discuss has not reached a
> critical mass of contributors. The question is how we can change that.
>
> All the best
> Henning
>
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 12:26:07PM +0200, Jeremy via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > Hi bitcoin-dev,
> >
> > I'm well aware that discussion of moderation on bitcoin-dev is
> > discouraged*. However, I think that we should, as a year of moderation
> > approaches, discuss openly as a community what the impact of such policy
> > has been. Making such a post now is timely given that people will have
> the
> > opportunity to discuss in-person as well as online as Scaling Bitcoin is
> > currently underway. On the suggestion of others, I've also CC'd
> > bitcoin-discuss on this message.
> >
> > Below, I'll share some of my own personal thoughts as a starter, but
> would
> > love to hear others feelings as well.
> >
> > For me, the bitcoin-dev mailing list was a place where I started
> > frequenting to learn a lot about bitcoin and the development process and
> > interact with the community. Since moderation has begun, it seems that
> the
> > messages/day has dropped drastically. This may be a nice outcome overall
> > for our sanity, but I think that it has on the whole made the community
> > less accessible. I've heard from people (a > 1 number, myself included)
> > that they now self-censor because they think they will put a lot of work
> > into their email only for it to get moderated away as trolling/spam.
> Thus,
> > while we may not observe a high rate of moderated posts, it does mean the
> > "chilling effect" of moderation still manifests -- I think that people
> not
> > writing emails because they think it may be moderated reduces the rate of
> > people writing emails which is a generally valuable thing as it offers
> > people a vehicle through which they try to think through and communicate
> > their ideas in detail.
> >
> > Overall, I think that at the time that moderation was added to the list,
> it
> > was probably the right thing to do. We're in a different place as a
> > community now, so I feel we should attempt to open up this valuable
> > communication channel once again. My sentiment is that we enacted
> > moderation to protect a resource that we all felt was valuable, but in
> the
> > process, the value of the list was damaged, but not irreparably so.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Jeremy
> >
> >
> > * From the email introducing the bitcoin-dev moderation policy,
> "Generally
> > discouraged: shower thoughts, wild speculation, jokes, +1s, non-technical
> > bitcoin issues, rehashing settled topics without new data, moderation
> >  concerns."
> >
> >
> > --
> > @JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
> > <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
> > bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
> --
> Henning Kopp
> Institute of Distributed Systems
> Ulm University, Germany
>
> Office: O27 - 3402
> Phone: +49 731 50-24138
> Web: http://www.uni-ulm.de/in/vs/~kopp
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>



-- 
I like to provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do you need a
techie?
I own Litmocracy <http://www.litmocracy.com> and Meme Racing
<http://www.memeracing.net> (in alpha).
I'm the webmaster for The Voluntaryist <http://www.voluntaryist.com> which
now accepts Bitcoin.
I also code for The Dollar Vigilante <http://dollarvigilante.com/>.
"He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules" - Satoshi
Nakamoto