 | NixOS Foundation | 454 Members |
| Public room for chatting with the NixOS Foundation Board | 113 Servers |
| NixOS Foundation | 454 Members |
| Public room for chatting with the NixOS Foundation Board | 113 Servers |
| Sender | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| 3 May 2024 | ||
 Janik (they/them) | In reply to @emma:rory.gay* We discussed that to length in #platform-governance:nixos.org (formerly the governance chat), and everyone had a chance to voice their opinion. Also Zulip makes a lot more sense for structured discussions, it's quite comparable to discourse just for real time messaging without encryption and worse moderation features then discourse (still better then matrix). | 22:10:31 |
 @emma:rory.gay | i wasnt aware that a choice was even being made, also are you saying matrix has terrible moderation tooling? | 22:11:23 |
| Janik (they/them) | In reply to @emma:rory.gayI'm not saying matrix moderation tooling is terrible, but I'm saying it's not good, esp. compared to discourse. | 22:12:25 |
| Janik (they/them) |
That's not our fault, the governance channel was as visible as every other matrix channel in the space, and it only affects governance discussions. There is no point to rehash this now since it was already decided and no one screamed stop in the process. (btw zulip is in the same sense federated that irc is and afaik we could just go and self host a instance if we plan to use zulip in the long run.) | 22:14:23 |
 @joepie91:pixie.town | I consider zulip fine in this case specifically because it is a temporary setup that needed to exist very quickly to solve an acute problem and with minimal disruption to the governance proceedings themselves | 22:15:48 |
 tomberek | Is it self-hosted now? | 22:16:32 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | I would have a problem with the broader community being moved there, but right now this was the only thing that made sense for this specific purpose | 22:16:32 |
| Janik (they/them) | In reply to @tomberek:matrix.orgI don't think s. cc @raitobezarius | 22:18:23 |
| Janik (they/them) | In reply to @tomberek:matrix.org* I don't think so. cc @raitobezarius | 22:18:30 |
 Dandellion | In reply to @janik0:matrix.orgWhile I can't legitimately argue for using matrix. I think this is a kind of bad take based on how quickly the decision was made and the conversation moved to who and how policy. We're talking single digit hours here. People not having a chance to speak up is completely reasonable. | 22:22:03 |
| Dandellion | There are also probably some optics issues with a small group of people kind moving the governance discussions off-platform, but I think is fine as long as we take the discussion again after the bootstrapping assembly process is completed and we do "real" governance discussions | 22:27:39 |
| Janik (they/them) | In reply to @dandellion:dodsorf.as I'd agree with you if it affected more then just governance and if it was longer then temporary. Also the governance discussions being invite only is a feature we want here since discourse and matrix where both brigaded by sock puppets everytime we had governance discussions. Please also keep in mind that we are on a very strict timeline of less then 14 days. | 22:31:41 |
 hexa | In reply to @emma:rory.gayyes, compared to discourse every moderation toolbox has been terrible so far | 22:34:35 |
| hexa | In reply to @tomberek:matrix.orgno, sponsored cloud for open source organisations | 22:34:47 |
| @emma:rory.gay | In reply to @hexa:lossy.networkive never used discourse before but i dont see what matrix is lacking | 22:37:42 |
| Dandellion | I believe the decision was the correct one, so I'm not going to play devil's advocate or concern-troll or anything. But us being on a strict schedule is not a reason I want to see being used throughout the project while a small group with the resources to take time off/live in the correct timezone do all the decisionmaking. I don't really think this will be an issue, but I find it important to highlight either way based on the deflecting tone in your reply to this concern being raised | 22:39:36 |
 @paperdigits:matrix.org | For one matrix requires a completely separate app for moderation | 22:39:38 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | Dandellion: while I understand the concern (and it is a genuine concern in and of itself), many of us have been working on this in some form for somewhere between months and years already, so there is very little energy left to get any kind of governance solution in place - and a significant effort was made to make this as broadly accessible as possible within the constraints | 22:41:11 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | this is likely the same reason for the deflecting tone; people are simply exhausted | 22:41:34 |
| @emma:rory.gay | In reply to @paperdigits:matrix.orgi dont think it does, but would love to hear more | 22:42:03 |
| @paperdigits:matrix.org | In reply to @emma:rory.gaySorry. Not app, its a bot: https://matrix.org/docs/communities/moderation/ | 22:43:32 |
| @emma:rory.gay | im surprised they link to mjolnir lol | 22:43:58 |
| @paperdigits:matrix.org | The discourse moderation tools are quite good, I've moderated a discourse instance for almost a decade now. They've put a lot of thought into the platform and the way it functions. | 22:44:27 |
| @emma:rory.gay | but yeah, thats something that simply isnt possible on something like matrix, versus discourse where yeah, you can easily just say "ban person from all topics" | 22:44:59 |
| @emma:rory.gay | and tbh i dont see it requiring a bot as a flaw, as it means you arent locked into one way of doing things | 22:47:15 |
| @paperdigits:matrix.org | I didn't say it was a flaw. It is different. I was also mod of a matrix room that was just a stock install, no bot, no anything except manually reading message. Terrible. | 22:48:38 |
| @paperdigits:matrix.org | This is probably off topic for this room, so I'll bow out. | 22:49:21 |
| @emma:rory.gay | #mod-ideas:matrix.org ? | 22:49:33 |
| Janik (they/them) | In reply to @emma:rory.gayThis is getting a bit off topic, but one of the best features of discourse moderation is trust-levels other things are being able to move messages to other threads (which zulip also supports), having slow mode, lot's of auto-moderation based on user flags (e.g. hiding posts when enough people flagged them, automatically put slow mode on topics/lock them if many posts in a thread got flagged), being able to hide threads so only participants can see them, reporting users (currently if you report a user the home-server admins get the report and there is no way to say pls. report this to space admins/mods), and lot's more. Matrix is simply lacking lot's of features you would want for large communities. Don't get me wrong, I want matrix to be a thing and I think it's awesome that matrix gets used by public institutes and governments but it still has lots of issues. | 22:50:50 |
| @emma:rory.gay | yeah fwiw most of those things i think are unsolvable in a federated context, anyways would recommend moving to that room or something more general like #general:conduit.rory.gay | 22:52:07 |