From: Jeremy <jlrubin@mit•edu>
To: Bitcoin development mailing list <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: bitcoin-discuss@lists•linuxfoundation.org
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] 1 Year bitcoin-dev Moderation Review
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 12:26:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAD5xwhgayR9CgfcypCwGEDyubE4z-mXEjxDmGh09GYO8nhm3Ow@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2308 bytes --]
Hi bitcoin-dev,
I'm well aware that discussion of moderation on bitcoin-dev is
discouraged*. However, I think that we should, as a year of moderation
approaches, discuss openly as a community what the impact of such policy
has been. Making such a post now is timely given that people will have the
opportunity to discuss in-person as well as online as Scaling Bitcoin is
currently underway. On the suggestion of others, I've also CC'd
bitcoin-discuss on this message.
Below, I'll share some of my own personal thoughts as a starter, but would
love to hear others feelings as well.
For me, the bitcoin-dev mailing list was a place where I started
frequenting to learn a lot about bitcoin and the development process and
interact with the community. Since moderation has begun, it seems that the
messages/day has dropped drastically. This may be a nice outcome overall
for our sanity, but I think that it has on the whole made the community
less accessible. I've heard from people (a > 1 number, myself included)
that they now self-censor because they think they will put a lot of work
into their email only for it to get moderated away as trolling/spam. Thus,
while we may not observe a high rate of moderated posts, it does mean the
"chilling effect" of moderation still manifests -- I think that people not
writing emails because they think it may be moderated reduces the rate of
people writing emails which is a generally valuable thing as it offers
people a vehicle through which they try to think through and communicate
their ideas in detail.
Overall, I think that at the time that moderation was added to the list, it
was probably the right thing to do. We're in a different place as a
community now, so I feel we should attempt to open up this valuable
communication channel once again. My sentiment is that we enacted
moderation to protect a resource that we all felt was valuable, but in the
process, the value of the list was damaged, but not irreparably so.
Best,
Jeremy
* From the email introducing the bitcoin-dev moderation policy, "Generally
discouraged: shower thoughts, wild speculation, jokes, +1s, non-technical
bitcoin issues, rehashing settled topics without new data, moderation
concerns."
--
@JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
<https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4803 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2016-10-09 10:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-09 10:26 Jeremy [this message]
2016-10-09 20:31 ` Ryan Grant
2016-10-10 7:38 ` Henning Kopp
2016-10-10 15:34 ` Dave Scotese
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAD5xwhgayR9CgfcypCwGEDyubE4z-mXEjxDmGh09GYO8nhm3Ow@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jlrubin@mit$(echo .)edu \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=bitcoin-discuss@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox