On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 23:14 -0700, Stephen Shaw wrote: I'm not on the IRC a lot, but I am on the mailinglist and more often than not, the disrespectful ones are the long time users (Or, more properly, those who are not asking the question, but the answerers.) I rarely come across a disrespectful OP. -- Kevin "Yo" Dupuy | Public Email: <kevin(a)kevinsword.com> Happy New Year from Yo.media! --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org

On 18/01/2008, Martin Lasarsch <mlasars(a)suse.de> wrote: Adding it to the guiding principles would require everyone to re-sign them. I am also not sure there is any need to add to the guiding principles, this code of conduct is almost as vague as the guiding principles. It is not something that can be enforced, only a guideline, we have lots of guidelines on the wiki already http://en.opensuse.org/OpenSUSE_mailing_list_netiquette for example. So I'm not sure that adding a vague code of conduct will make any difference to anything. We have a set of rules for IRC already http://suse-irc.org/rules.html , and are open to having more people to help enforce them. Whenever we have investigated public complaints about behaviour on IRC it has turned out to be certain regulars rather than OPs who people have had problems with. -- Benjamin Weber --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rajko M. wrote: [...] [...] I don't think there's any benefit in such measures that, btw, are quite complex to implement. People who want to abuse and troll will keep on doing it, they'll cloak, they'll use other servers to connect with a different IP, they'll create new email addresses on gmail or yahoo, etc... I'm afraid we really do need a "police". Which means we need people who help with that. cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org

This is why Pascal is correct and the voting thing you've proposed is completely doomed to fail. Those wanting a voting system are the ones who wants to have the power to do something, but they dont have the merit. Those who will step up to be "moderators" are often the least indicated to be "moderators" (for politesse, I will not point examples in the past, but trust me I could). First, with all that you want to force an infrastructure to be created (your vote out system), and who is goin to program, design and test it? I would prefer people investing their time in the distro, instead. When I see people proposing "lets vote" and stuff in things like this I can not help to think that what you really want is to impose your own will by voting manipulation. Most things in places like this are taken by consensus, and not by voting. Sensible decisions comes by consensus, not by voting. In all media there are already "moderators" and people in charge. As I've said earlier, solving problems is all about solving problems. We can create a code of conduct, guideline, bylaws, constitutions, improvement day task lists, but they are going to be piece of internetic papers if people are not going to act and enforce on that. And from what I know, things are getting enforced. Let the people do their jobs. That already exist, you dont need to vote for people to be that. The list already have a moderator. The irc channel have operators. The forums have moderators, etc etc etc. Nobody, it shouldnt be the most democratic system where everybody has equal rights. It should be a meritocracy, and in a meritocracy you dont need to vote They already do in the appropriate media Nobody, people have already too much work to do to oversee something or somebody. The guys appointed by meritocracy dont need that. Nobody, in a meritocracy that's usually not needed, people are sensible enough to get to a common conclusion without needing to vote. They already do in the appropriate media And just to end: Federico, I've heard three or four times gnome people complaining about irc in the list. Wouldnt it be more appropriate to complain to the operators of the channel right when it happened, and giving the names and logs, so he can do something? I believe that would work the best for that case. Best regards Marcio Ferreira --- Druid --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rajko M. wrote: Maybe you should explain in a little more detail what you actually mean with voting (from a technical point of view). My understanding of what you wrote is that when someone is abusing/trolling, he's put up to a vote of anyone on whether he should be banned or not. I don't see that as a practical approach, just because 1) abuse on IRC has to be stopped immediately, it's real time, it's annoying for the 200+ people in the room 2) abuse on forums is legion, moderators spend quite some time removing and banning spam and trolls every single day On mailing-lists, it might be possible, but even there it's just too slow of a process. We're not in a market economy. It's obviously important to know what the majority wants, but it's also important to know what the best solutions and choices are, based on experience (technical, community, ...). You can't, because the majority isn't even participating in polls/votes nor discussions like these (and that's much more important issue than the code of conduct, but I'm not sure whether it can be solved). That situation, btw, can only be improved through more communication, accessible communication channels, unification of the various parts of our community (people helping on mailing-lists, people busy on the several forums we have, regulars on IRC, packagers, developers, translators, wiki contributors, etc...). I don't think there's anything wrong with - - having guidelines that define what we think are good practices and a good ground for fertile collaboration, contribution and use (note that "we" = the community, as the Guidelines have been discussed at length on this mailing-list) - - having moderators who enforce those rules, and other aspects they think are necessary for having a working community How do you mean, "volunteers are self appointed right now" ? What you are writing may apply in a government, but certainly not for the actual matters we're discussing. This is about a code of conduct for communication and behaviour, most specifically in things like mailing-lists, forums and IRC. When you have someone with abusive behaviour (insulting, blatantly trolling, spamming, etc...) who generates a lot of frustration and bad mood on a community media, you have to get rid of him as quickly as possible, as it's driving people away. There's no time to make a public vote at a parliament and then have administrators close down accounts. I really don't think the analogy applies. [...] To me the reasons are two-fold: - - it is currently working reasonably well, but can be improved - - it's mostly about having it written black on white somewhere (which is mostly the case but in different locations, written by different people, ...) Actually it's the exact opposite. Meritocracy is a distinctive feature of communities as ours (opensource communities), and doesn't apply _at_ _all_ in the corporate environment (in companies that want to make money). Meritocracy is really one of the things that are driving all this. Some people put a lot of work, time, know-how and passion into their contributions to our community (as in other opensource communities), and they deserve credit, respect and a voice for that. And seriously, this is absolutely not how it's working in the corporate environment. It's typically quite the opposite. To me it's not about "convincing", it's about making the best community from a human point of view, and the best distribution from a technical point of view. Atmosphere, effectiveness and quality are the factors that must be convincing, not ... what ? Could you please explain what, in your opinion, is a superior alternative to meritocracy in our context. And as for dealing with volunteers, again, meritocracy is the best approach, because those volunteers who effectively drive the community forward through their contributions (of whatever sorts) get certain things back from the community. At least the latter is how it should be, and there's probably some room for improvement in that area. The others, the "wannabees" as you call them yourself, are not helping the community and hence.. who cares. And before you pick on that point, the community isn't some beast that has to be nurtured by sleepless nights of its enslaved contributors. The community is us. It's you, it's me, it's the users, it's the contributors. But to me, the very first condition for being part of a community is wanting to take part in it. See, that's what meritocracy is all about: the mods aren't wannabees. And what would an "officially appointed one" be ? Someone from Novell ? Someone designated into that role by .. whom, public vote (where? how? is that representative of a majority?), the board, Novell ? Could we just grow up and stop looking up to Novell or "officialness" to actually get something done ? cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org

Druid escribió: I agree with your analysis and I really cannot imagine any other way to govern the community that will possible work. -- "The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education." - Albert Einstein Cristian Rodríguez R. Platform/OpenSUSE - Core Services SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development http://www.opensuse.org/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org

Greetings! Would the moderators (if there are any) *please* KILL THIS THREAD! it is embarrassing. I'm new to this email list, and a relatively new opensuse user. I agree that there should be some general codes of conduct.. but those should be set by the moderators.. and the people who don't like the codes of conduct or how they are being enforced and care enough about it they should be encouraged to start up their own email list. SOLUTION: Find a list that parallels the function/demographic of this one.. check their guidelines.. tweak them a bit.. and call it done. If people stop using the list, ask them why and tweak again.. OpenSuSE is an organization that fosters a collaboration concerning a linux distribution.. but every activity within OpenSuSE's organization does *not* need to be decided by the user-base. Think of it as a degree of quality control. If this thread goes on much farther I'm going to leave the list. I have better things to do with my time.

Greetings! Perhaps I was a bit too hasty and fell into the trap of judging this list's value to myself based largely on this thread. I had great hopes of gleaning useful information about the direction of OpenSuSE from it and so far I have only seen agenda items (good) and heated debates about things that are not about OpenSuSE. Even with my status as a new subscriber, I remember the first post asking for discussion about a code of conduct. I thought that it was a good idea, and respected the OpenSuSE board for opening up the topic to the community for input.. but the discussion seems to have wandered too close to the ridiculous.. filled with more energy than is worth spending on the topic.. which is why I offered my opinion that the thread should be killed soon. But, that isn't my call.. it's just my opinion. I'm going to take your suggestion and make that filter rule for this thread.. I hope ya'll work it out soon. Good luck. Bryen wrote:

On Jan 24, 2008 5:29 PM, Thomas Hertweck <Thomas.Hertweck(a)web.de> wrote: Hi Thomas, Some are to blame for excesses, other for omitting themselves. Enough said. One that wasn't polite for a start shouldn't ask for politesse. And remember what Ive said that politesse is not a matter of someone using the word fucktard or not. Its a wider concept. Go through my list of aggressive things to check examples. And Thomas, don't try to provoke again with statements like "a so-called expert you should know better". This doesn't work with me, you know, it just shows your arrogant behaviour and that you are not able to respect and tolerate other opinions. Ill keep it small, because thanks to the priceless insights from certain people, this is almost a typical-opensuse-list-thread (tm) already. Best Regards, Marcio --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org