!YvjJmbmVxFKdRqsLPx:nixos.org

RFC 98 Chat

52 Members
Discussion on RFC 98 [Community Team] https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/9824 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
5 Nov 2021
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈but we should also be careful that it doesn't become (or look like) an exhaustive list18:37:03
@zimbatm:numtide.comJonas ChevalierAnother way to defuse some of the trust issues would be to add a failsafe mechanism, or just try the moderation team for X months18:37:21
@zimbatm:numtide.comJonas ChevalierOnce we have a concrete implementation, it will help people see that this can work18:37:49
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈with my 'experienced community manager' hat on I would suggest setting X fairly high18:37:59
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈it usually takes some time for people to adjust to this kind of community management model, and to learn to understand each other's communication patterns around conflict18:38:22
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈a month is unlikely to be enough; probably also won't need 6 months like in some communities I've cleaned up, but probably something along the lines of 3-4 months18:38:51
@zimbatm:numtide.comJonas Chevalier
In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
I agree that specific examples can help communicate what is meant, yes
I mean that the replacement & omission of words, and their related effects depends on the context.
18:39:13
@zimbatm:numtide.comJonas Chevalier
In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
I agree that specific examples can help communicate what is meant, yes
* I mean that the replacement & omission of words, and their related effects depends on the context (in the document).
18:39:20
@zimbatm:numtide.comJonas Chevalieryeah 6 months sounds reasonable18:39:35
@zimbatm:numtide.comJonas Chevalieror one release cycle :)18:39:46
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈I would expect 6 months to definitely be enough18:39:49
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈counting from the actual start of implementation, not acceptance of RFC, ofc :)18:40:00
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈as there'll likely be a delay in assembling a team18:40:14
@zimbatm:numtide.comJonas Chevalierthe biggest body of work is actually outside of the RFC18:41:15
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈also, if I recall correctly (been a while since reading the RFC), the nixos foundation ultimately has the power to disband the moderation team anyway, right? if things were to go severely wron18:41:23
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈 * also, if I recall correctly (been a while since reading the RFC), the nixos foundation ultimately has the power to disband the moderation team anyway, right? if things were to go severely wrong18:41:24
@zimbatm:numtide.comJonas Chevalierto establish sane moderation practices, it takes a lot of time18:41:32
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈yeah, definitely18:41:38
@zimbatm:numtide.comJonas Chevaliertechnically, anybody can still submit a new RFC to disband the team18:42:04
@zimbatm:numtide.comJonas Chevalierwe could pre-emptively submit that RFC given how long they take :p18:42:44
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈I mean, sure, but a bikesheddable mechanism does not make for a very good safeguard :)18:43:17
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈see: US filibusters18:43:25
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈I think a defined trial period (with some sort of approval mechanism) and an ultimate power invested in the foundation are good safeguards18:44:04
@zimbatm:numtide.comJonas Chevalierluckily nobody depends on the outcomes of the NixOS community to live18:44:11
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈I would not be so sure18:44:25
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈keep in mind we have a growing side-industry of NixOS consultancy18:44:54
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈 I think we should treat this with the importance that that warrants 18:45:22
@joepie91:pixie.townjoepie91 🏳️‍🌈 * keep in mind we have a growing side-industry of NixOS consultancy (individuals, not corporations)18:45:46
@kity:kity.wtfash (it/its) 🏳️‍⚧️i'll definitely discuss the trial period idea with irenes, thank you18:49:56
@piegames:matrix.orgpiegames
In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
jonringer: okay, so let me try to rephrase my summary of your concern: you are fine with eg. respecting someone's pronouns or otherwise doing your part in adapting to social norms in a community, but your concern is that those norms might be 'overzealously' applied in cases where you failed to follow them through no fault of your own, for example because you were not aware of them or because they are difficult for you personally to adapt to?
A word on this: mistakes are happen, we are all human. The more important point is how a person reacts when pointed out. With that in mind, nobody should be in fear of making mistakes.
18:58:09

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6