!VyoUhyWvlhSpFWWxHL:matrix.org

Zulip setup coordination

91 Members
Coordination to setup https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/, see https://github.com/NixOS/foundation/issues/14334 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
2 May 2024
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 ๐Ÿณ๏ธโ€๐ŸŒˆso the best we can do under those circumstances is to communicate as clearly as possible, explain where needed, correct misunderstandings where they come up21:40:17
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 ๐Ÿณ๏ธโ€๐ŸŒˆ and even then some subset of people will simply not believe it because of various perception biases, even without any malicious intentions 21:40:55
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 ๐Ÿณ๏ธโ€๐ŸŒˆ(such as the one where people tend to believe the version of the story that they hear first, no matter its accuracy)21:41:15
@7c6f434c:nitro.chat7c6f434cJust in case: my PR 15 against CoC has an implication that up-front communication was not clear enough, which I endorse. (Not saying it is someone's fault, nobody had time to polish things to perfection and guess all the things, etc.)21:42:37
@samrose:matrix.orgsamrose The language gives people a way to resolve disputes 21:42:38
@infinisil:matrix.orginfinisilI think the board should just make a decision on https://github.com/NixOS/foundation/pull/144 now21:43:41
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 ๐Ÿณ๏ธโ€๐ŸŒˆyeah, this risks becoming an arguing magnet rather than substantive review, tbh21:44:05
@danielle:fairydust.spacedanielle ronef: you around? 21:44:20
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 ๐Ÿณ๏ธโ€๐ŸŒˆwith people trying to frontload the governance process but without any of the safety and moderation mechanisms we've carefully designed21:44:25
@shlevy:matrix.orgshlevyIn my view a quick decision without time for serious comments to be made and addressed will be perceived as an illegitimate power play. Depends on how much youโ€™re concerned with the opinions of those who are not convinced about this style of moderation.21:44:49
@edef1c:matrix.orgedef we do have 12 days to go 21:45:39
@edef1c:matrix.orgedefwhich is not a lot of time21:45:52
@danielle:fairydust.spacedanielle11, in 15 minutes21:45:53
@shlevy:matrix.orgshlevy That timeline was also imposed. 21:45:55
@edef1c:matrix.orgedefit is, but there is a legitimacy factor at play there too21:46:13
@infinisil:matrix.orginfinisilAt some point you just need to make some decisions to move on ๐Ÿ˜…21:46:40
@danielle:fairydust.spacedanielle
In reply to @shlevy:matrix.org
That timeline was also imposed.
tbf the original suggestion from the board there was 10 days, I said give it 14 instead.
21:46:42
@edef1c:matrix.orgedefwe can't say "we will have an answer in three months", and honestly 14 days is on the long side in some ways21:46:46
@shlevy:matrix.orgshlevy Anyway, Iโ€™m fine personally with this CoC, though Iโ€™d prefer squalusโ€™s suggestion of starting with the Zulip terms and iterating from there if problems arise, Iโ€™m just pointing out that there is a cost to a rapid merge here. 21:47:26
@danielle:fairydust.spacedaniellefwiw i based that doc on a mix of Drupal, Mozilla, and the CNCF, which are all fairly large incredibly diverse organizations with a lot of experience.21:48:02
@danielle:fairydust.spacedanielle(like kubernetes projects alone have had 15000 contributors)21:48:20
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 ๐Ÿณ๏ธโ€๐ŸŒˆ
In reply to @shlevy:matrix.org
In my view a quick decision without time for serious comments to be made and addressed will be perceived as an illegitimate power play. Depends on how much youโ€™re concerned with the opinions of those who are not convinced about this style of moderation.
the thing is that the venue for "serious comments" is meant to be the zulip, not a procedural PR thread - and I feel that it doesn't really matter what we do, it's going to be perceived as a power play either way, based on experiences so far
21:48:27
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 ๐Ÿณ๏ธโ€๐ŸŒˆ
In reply to @shlevy:matrix.org
In my view a quick decision without time for serious comments to be made and addressed will be perceived as an illegitimate power play. Depends on how much youโ€™re concerned with the opinions of those who are not convinced about this style of moderation.
* the thing is that the venue for "serious comments" is meant to be the zulip, not a procedural PR thread (and for good reason) - and I feel that it doesn't really matter what we do, it's going to be perceived as a power play either way, based on experiences so far
21:48:38
@samrose:matrix.orgsamroseIs this a one and done thing, will there likely be an ongoing way for the community to feed back and evolve the initial outcome?21:49:54
@ronef:matrix.orgronef
In reply to @danielle:fairydust.space
ronef: you around?
here, whatsup?
21:49:56
@shlevy:matrix.orgshlevy I agree some people will perceive it that way regardless. The question is how much work/delay youโ€™re willing to put in to convince people on the margins. I donโ€™t even think itโ€™s necessarily wrong to just jump in now, but itโ€™s not a binary choice between interminable delay vs immediate moving forward 21:50:08
@danielle:fairydust.spacedanielle
In reply to @ronef:matrix.org
here, whatsup?
Can you [board hat on] review https://github.com/NixOS/foundation/pull/144 ?
21:50:25
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 ๐Ÿณ๏ธโ€๐ŸŒˆ shlevy: if I'm measuring by the comments landing in the github thread and the discourse thread, I don't think there's any mileage we're going to get out of this that is not better achieved by having this conversation on zulip 21:50:48
@edef1c:matrix.orgedef
In reply to @shlevy:matrix.org
I agree some people will perceive it that way regardless. The question is how much work/delay youโ€™re willing to put in to convince people on the margins. I donโ€™t even think itโ€™s necessarily wrong to just jump in now, but itโ€™s not a binary choice between interminable delay vs immediate moving forward
no contest there, i'm just curious what kind of review period you have in mind
21:50:52
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 ๐Ÿณ๏ธโ€๐ŸŒˆ(I've been monitoring both quite proactively)21:51:05

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 10