| 22 Nov 2021 |
 Irenes | hm | 23:41:41 |
| Irenes | interesting thought about the log being private I guess | 23:41:48 |
| Irenes | like visible only to moderators maybe? | 23:41:53 |
| Irenes | I don't think that would be right for this proposal, because we're trying to minimize the extent to which the community team's formal power places them above the rest of the community | 23:42:17 |
| Irenes | like there's a need for there to be some or this wouldn't work because bad actors would refuse to engage with it | 23:42:31 |
| Irenes | but we want it to be just the essential elements | 23:42:39 |
| Irenes | but it could well be the right idea for a different community, with different goals | 23:42:53 |
 @ryblade:matrix.org | In reply to @abathur:matrix.org
(note, I didn't say that it should be public; you've projected that) excuse me, please cool it with the accusations, okay? "having a log that says a dozen contributors have blocked X for Y" is what you said, you were never clear about who would see this log. since we are discussing this in the context of an open source project, it was only natural that i assumed some transparency would be involved. furthermore, i still refuse to upload any data to even a private team of moderators whenever i block a person. that. is. PRIVATE. | 23:42:55 |
| Irenes | yeah I think it was a natural way to understand the thing, fwiw, and I also read it that way at first | 23:44:03 |
 @abathur:matrix.org | You have the power to ask if I meant a private or public log | 23:46:55 |
| @ryblade:matrix.org | i also have the power to not CONSENT to such a system in the first place, public or private. | 23:47:50 |
| @abathur:matrix.org | Sure | 23:48:07 |
| @ryblade:matrix.org | and please refrain from demeaning me, i've already asked this once already | 23:48:37 |
| @ryblade:matrix.org | reminding me i have the power and all that, honestly | 23:48:52 |
| @ryblade:matrix.org | i am talking about blocking people being a personal virtue of mine, after all. i'm quite aware of the power that's available to me. but i'd prefer that we be capable of having a discussion without enmity. | 23:50:49 |
| Irenes | abathur: I appreciate you offering the correction about what you meant | 23:51:02 |
| Irenes | I do think misunderstandings happen | 23:51:09 |
| Irenes | you've corrected it now and I hope we can proceed to discuss what you were trying to say, not the manner it was said in | 23:51:29 |
| Irenes | and without making this personal | 23:51:35 |
| Irenes | I also am aware you're not fully at-keyboard now, and that this may not be the best time, and that's okay | 23:52:10 |
| @abathur:matrix.org | I don't really feel like thinking out loud with absolute all caps rejections based on inferences | 23:54:25 |
| @abathur:matrix.org | I think it's enough to sum it up: good history improves decisions | 23:55:05 |
| Irenes | all right. I have no authority here, but as somebody who cares about stuff, I think both of you have said your piece and I'd like to ask you both to take a break and cool down a bit. | 23:55:26 |
| @abathur:matrix.org | And part of good history is detaching the history mechanisms from punishment | 23:55:34 |
| @ryblade:matrix.org | In reply to @abathur:matrix.org
I don't really feel like thinking out loud with absolute all caps rejections based on inferences it was one word and you were already warned about nit-picking over words and language policing | 23:55:38 |
| Irenes | you're free to ignore that request. | 23:55:39 |
| Irenes | but I think things will go better with a break. | 23:55:51 |
| @ryblade:matrix.org | In reply to @abathur:matrix.org
I don't really feel like thinking out loud with absolute all caps rejections based on inferences * absolute? it was one word, and you were already warned about nit-picking over words and language policing | 23:56:03 |
| Irenes | that means both of you just to be clear | 23:56:24 |
| Irenes | stepping back only works if it's bilateral | 23:56:32 |
