| 7 Nov 2021 |
 joepie91 🏳️🌈 | and while that is still a fairly explicit failure mode that's fairly easy to see and point at, there are many more subtle problems that fan out from social-issue-ignoring technical design choices, that aren't obvious to someone who isn't already very familiar with the problem domain | 10:35:55 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | and no one person is going to spot every single issue themselves, because nobody has a full view of the world, and that is IMO why it's important to embed these sort of social considerations into the culture behind a project and actively ensure a diversity of 'vantage points' | 10:37:18 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | * and no one person is going to spot every single issue themselves, because nobody has a full view of the world, and that is IMO why it's important to embed these sort of social considerations into the culture behind a project and actively ensure a diversity of 'vantage points' or backgrounds | 10:37:35 |
 problems | irenes and i certainly don't have every viewpoint or insight, which is why we're so glad to see constructive feedback | 10:42:02 |
 tomberek | That is my question, what feedback has been considered as constructive? | 10:45:08 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | In reply to @tomberek:matrix.org
Perhaps I missed something; what was meant with "legitimate concerns" in the RFC thread? What were the language issues that were being acknowledged there? just realized that this question may have been aimed at me? I think I was the only one who used that particular phrase | 10:45:47 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | (asking so that I don't talk over others :p) | 10:48:21 |
 piegames | In reply to @kity:kity.wtf
irenes and i certainly don't have every viewpoint or insight, which is why we're so glad to see constructive feedback joepie91 🏳️🌈: ⬆️ | 10:50:45 |
| problems | i can't answer right now as an rfc author because i'm frankly too tired and need to sleep, but i think the original question was aimed at joepie91 🏳️🌈 | 10:53:21 |
| piegames | Timezones are fun | 10:53:47 |
| problems | feel free to take the floor with that. i'm off to bed | 10:53:51 |
| * piegames was wondering the other day how you kept talking till 4am. Well, most probably didn't … | 10:54:08 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | goodnight! | 10:54:19 |
| problems | In reply to @piegames:matrix.org
was wondering the other day how you kept talking till 4am. Well, most probably didn't … actually it was 7 | 10:56:23 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | tomberek: okay, so I'll try to answer the 'legitimate concerns' question from my perspective at least: an example would be the concerns brought up by jonringer here two(?) days ago, which after narrowing down seemed to work out mainly to 'overzealous application of norms without consideration for people needing to adjust' | 10:56:54 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | I've talked to them a bit further in DM afterwards, and I am convinced that those concerns were 'real' concerns, and not a constructed pretext for bigotry or something like that (which does usually happen with a handful of people on topics like these) | 10:57:56 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | that's the distinction that I intended to draw in my comment; those who have real concerns that they might be unable to express 'politely'(?), vs. those who are constructing fake concerns to steer the community away from moderating abusive behaviour (ie. concern trolling) | 10:58:57 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | my words are not the best today but I hope that makes sense :p | 10:59:12 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | (and yes, I recognize that it can be very difficult to distinguish between those two sometimes, that's part of the reason for my open invite for people to DM me unfiltered - it would make no sense for a concern troll to take me up on that, but it could make sense for someone who legitimately feels unheard and/or uncomfortable with expressing themselves publicly) | 11:00:10 |
| tomberek | That's it? That it was overzealous and that people must adjust to the norms eventually, they have no choice in the matter? | 11:09:35 |
 @jkarlson:kapsi.fi | that is true by definition? | 11:10:08 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | I'm unsure how to parse that question | 11:10:10 |
| @jkarlson:kapsi.fi | it is a norm if and only if one has to adjust to it? | 11:10:26 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | right, that is why I'm having trouble parsing the question | 11:10:38 |
| @jkarlson:kapsi.fi | probably they mean too strict norms | 11:10:53 |
| @jkarlson:kapsi.fi | or maybe | 11:10:58 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | all communities operate like this, all communities have some set of social norms, implicit or explicit, loose or strict norms, but some set that people need to adjust to over time to have the community function | 11:11:12 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | like, that is just very fundamentally how social interaction works | 11:11:39 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | and the concern in jonringer's case specifically seemed to be "unreasonable social norms and/or not enough space/time to adjust to the norms" | 11:12:08 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | which is a completely valid concern | 11:12:19 |
