| 3 May 2024 |
 danielle | In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
reminder to mods to close governance discussion on the Discourse * there's no way to close "categories" as a whole afaict | 12:13:33 |
| danielle | so it's probably a case of just close indiscriminately as they pop up | 12:13:53 |
 @hexa:lossy.network | even if you did, people would just post in another 🙂 | 12:13:53 |
 joepie91 🏳️🌈 | In reply to @danielle:fairydust.space
so it's probably a case of just close indiscriminately as they pop up works for me, honestly, as long as it is done sufficiently consistently and while clearly communicating that the governance discussions are now to go on the zulip (so that people understand why it was closed) | 12:26:29 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | and I mean, if you tell people "new governance threads are not allowed" and they insist on making them anyway, that seems to steer pretty obviously into bannable behaviour | 12:27:38 |
 edef | slightly concerned that we might accidentally close off people's access to Zulip | 12:28:21 |
| edef | since the application process is at least in part on Discourse | 12:28:36 |
| edef | if the same person starts governance threads repeatedly, that is a different issue | 12:28:52 |
| danielle | that bit we're not gonna do anything with (Aside from maybe throw on a 1 post/day slow mode) | 12:29:01 |
| danielle | (because the intent of that thread is "post a thing to apply, then never again") | 12:29:23 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | edef: right, I'm specifically referring to "people who have been told to stop the discourse governance'ing and ignore that directive and create a new topic anyway or hijack another thread because nothing technically prevents them from doing so" | 12:37:30 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | this is likely a small group but we do have a bunch of people who have been behaving that way | 12:37:48 |
| danielle | they've thankfully stopped for now, so I have some hope that people are committed to the process | 12:38:44 |
| danielle | and if they're not... well... that's a solvable problem when it comes up again (i just really hope it doesn't) | 12:39:09 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | probably the most important thing here, honestly, is to make the formal announcement that the zulip is open, applications are being processed, and from this point on governance discussions are no longer allowed on the discourse. the rest is just implementation stuff to make that policy hold up | 12:40:11 |
| edef | infinisil: do we want to close Discourse topics that are "moved" to Zulip? | 12:41:04 |
 infinisil | edef: (@hexa just did) | 12:47:29 |
| infinisil | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
raitobezarius: Wait why are Zulip owner again? It was decided that board observers should only be admins Wait why am I an owner now? 🧐 | 13:26:40 |
| infinisil | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
raitobezarius: Wait why are Zulip owner again? It was decided that board observers should only be admins * Wait why am I an owner now too? 🧐 | 13:26:49 |
 raitobezarius | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
Wait why am I an owner now too? 🧐 Jonas put you and me owner | 13:26:56 |
| raitobezarius | This was written in a thread | 13:26:58 |
| raitobezarius | But Matrix | 13:27:00 |
| raitobezarius | Because some stuff requires ownership | 13:27:04 |
| infinisil | Ah I guess I missed that | 13:27:06 |
| raitobezarius | Honestly, given that owners are quite away, I would rather keep ownership so we can be operational | 13:27:20 |
| infinisil | Yeah | 13:27:29 |
| raitobezarius | And I personally do not see problem for you to be co-owner if that gives you more comfort in the process | 13:27:36 |
|  @ultranix:matrix.org joined the room. | 13:51:55 |
 @arianvp:matrix.org | FWIW i can not log in with Github selecting the email I was invited to even though I have an invite on said email | 14:15:45 |
| @arianvp:matrix.org | if I click on the invite link it wants me to pick a password instead | 14:15:52 |
