!VyoUhyWvlhSpFWWxHL:matrix.org

Zulip setup coordination

88 Members
Coordination to setup https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/, see https://github.com/NixOS/foundation/issues/14331 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
2 May 2024
@squalus0:matrix.org@squalus0:matrix.org joined the room.20:15:00
@danielle:fairydust.spacedanielleHow much time do we want to spend replying to comments from people who aren't part of the nix community?20:18:26
@shlevy:matrix.orgshlevy
In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
shlevy: (thumbs up on the comment would be helpful if you agree with the summary, to confirm)
Replied
20:19:42
@7c6f434c:nitro.chat7c6f434cYou want to say «not eligible for Zulip governance read-write access»? (what is a part of Nix community is still in air…) It's true that they kind of don't have true vested interest20:20:09
@7c6f434c:nitro.chat7c6f434c * You want to say «not eligible for Zulip governance read-write access»? (what is to be a part of Nix community is still in the air…) It's true that they kind of don't have true vested interest20:20:35
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈 shlevy: thanks 20:23:14
@lovesegfault:matrix.orglovesegfault
In reply to @danielle:fairydust.space
How much time do we want to spend replying to comments from people who aren't part of the nix community?
Almost none, IMO
20:23:50
@lovesegfault:matrix.orglovesegfaultThe most destructive thing to any discussion is someone with no skin in the game20:24:18
@zimbatm:numtide.com@zimbatm:numtide.com
In reply to @shlevy:matrix.org
OK, I’m willing to sign on to this.
Is there a way to phrase that better so you would have understood this in the first read? The difference is quite subtle IMO so it's easy to misunderstand it.
20:25:03
@davsanchez_:matrix.orgDavid SánchezSorry if this has been brought up steady, please feel free to point me for the references if any, but what’s “the community” here? Contributors to nixpkgs?20:25:12
@davsanchez_:matrix.orgDavid Sánchez* Sorry if this has been brought up already, please feel free to point me for the references if any, but what’s “the community” here? Contributors to nixpkgs?20:25:27
@shlevy:matrix.orgshlevy
In reply to @zimbatm:numtide.com
Is there a way to phrase that better so you would have understood this in the first read? The difference is quite subtle IMO so it's easy to misunderstand it.
“apologize that harm was caused” would’ve been clearer I think.
20:25:33
@shlevy:matrix.orgshlevyI don’t think this is necessary but it may be worthwhile to say “if you believe an accusation is being made in bad faith, please work with the moderators rather than counter-accusing or dismissing the claim”20:26:17
@shlevy:matrix.orgshlevy David Sánchez: There’s a list of criteria in the Zulip join issue 20:26:40
@shlevy:matrix.orgshlevyhttps://github.com/NixOS/foundation/issues/14320:26:57
@danielle:fairydust.spacedanielle
In reply to @shlevy:matrix.org
I don’t think this is necessary but it may be worthwhile to say “if you believe an accusation is being made in bad faith, please work with the moderators rather than counter-accusing or dismissing the claim”
Bad faith activity is already included fwiw
20:27:15
@shlevy:matrix.orgshlevyYes, that’s part of why I don’t think it’s necessary. The only reason I think it might be worth saying anyway is that there is an existing impression (justified or not) that some people have been leveraging these kinds of policies to get people moderated, and it’s easy enough to clarify that this policy is all under a presumption of good faith.20:28:15
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈 nyanbinary: assuming that's you posting on the CoC PR, please leave your comments attached to a line so it becomes a thread 20:28:42
@niko:conduit.rsnyanbinaryoki20:29:00
@niko:conduit.rsnyanbinary:320:29:00
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈(discussion will quickly become unmanageable otherwise)20:29:17
@danielle:fairydust.spacedanielle
In reply to @niko:conduit.rs
oki
fwiw if you leave a suggestion to add things, it should be an easy accept when infinisil is back
20:29:33
@shlevy:matrix.orgshlevyHmm it looks like I don’t have the right to mark my thread as resolved, can a PR admin do so?20:30:09
@infinisil:matrix.orginfinisil Ping me if everything seems resolved with a suggestion! 20:30:34
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈
In reply to @shlevy:matrix.org
Yes, that’s part of why I don’t think it’s necessary. The only reason I think it might be worth saying anyway is that there is an existing impression (justified or not) that some people have been leveraging these kinds of policies to get people moderated, and it’s easy enough to clarify that this policy is all under a presumption of good faith.
I see the argument, but I also feel that it's very easy to get the wording wrong and basically make third-party deescalation as well as "setting personal boundaries" impossible
20:30:37
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈(as is generally the risk of hardcoded rules)20:31:09
@shlevy:matrix.orgshlevy Maybe modify the bad faith invitations to engage in debate to say or leverage the CoC against another participant? 20:32:13
@niko:conduit.rsnyanbinary
In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
nyanbinary: assuming that's you posting on the CoC PR, please leave your comments attached to a line so it becomes a thread
there mrow
20:32:41
@niko:conduit.rsnyanbinary:320:32:42
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈that would be an example of getting the wording wrong :)20:32:44

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 10