I do like that the volume of emails has been reduced substantially. I used to delete hordes of dev emails because I couldn't keep up. At least now I feel like I'm able to skim most things that look interesting and I get to assume that if the subject seems relevant to me the content is worthwhile.
My life has improved because of the changes.
+1The distinction we are making importantly requires that contributors provide readers with another thing to say in favor of something - another thing which is different than "X people support this instead of only X-1 people." Evidence trumps votes.On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Gavin via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2016, at 3:59 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> I would extend this to say that the technical explanation also should
> contribute uniquely to the conversation; a +1 with an explanation
> the last +1 gave isn't useful.
Yes, comments should contribute to the discussion, with either technical discussion or additional relevant data. I think a +1 like the following should be encouraged:
"+1: we had eleven customer support tickets in just the last week that would have been prevented if XYZ.
Jane Doe, CTO CoinBitChainBasely.com"
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--I like to provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do you need a techie?
I own Litmocracy and Meme Racing (in alpha).
I'm the webmaster for The Voluntaryist which now accepts Bitcoin.
I also code for The Dollar Vigilante.
"He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules" - Satoshi Nakamoto
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev