posting guide?

posting guide?

[Jay Kerns]

The past few days have reminded me of something somebody famous
once said [1]. I can already see work being done to protect the
community for the future, yet I believe there is more we might do
to be even stronger.

I understand and appreciate Bastien's stated position regarding
moderator controls [2], and in that particular case I think he
did the right thing. At the same time, I do not possess his
seemingly superhuman level of patience, temperance, and couth.

Yes, I can add people to my SPAM filter (which I did, BTW), but
that action protects only *me*.  It does not protect the
community. Further, my later blissful ignorance means I am
unavailable to respond to future threats, so malicious
individuals are left to run rampant and destroy everybody else
still hanging around.  Of course, if *everybody* agrees to divert
to SPAM then we're all set.

That's my point: I propose that we, as a community, come to some
sort of consensus as to what un/acceptable behavior is and an
accepted mechanism of response.  One way to accomplish this is
with a posting guide. I have some thoughts about this:

1. It should be written and maintained by the community. On
Worg, for instance.

2. It should be minimal. Posting guides sometimes go overboard,
to the extent that they can be (and sometimes are) used as a
weapon.  I do *not* propose that.  If we insist on 1) then I
trust the community to handle it with care.

3. It should contain things which help new users draft messages
that are informative and targeted to whatever problem they're
having, things they might not have known otherwise (things like
M-x org-version, M-x toggle-debug-on-error, etc.).

4. I think we can all agree that messages like this [3] should
not be tolerated, ever, under any circumstances.  If a person
resorts to ad hominem attacks of this sort (or similar)
then (s)he should promptly be shown the door.  Period.  As far as
I am concerned, that's pretty much the only thing I can't
stomach, but maybe the larger community considers other subjects
to be off-topic or unwelcome on the list.  That would be for the
community to decide.


All the above is a long-winded way to say that every community
has some /minimum/ standards and expectations of conduct,
otherwise we're just a bunch of people standing around in the
same (virtual) place.  To date, these expectations have lived
unspoken or scattered around in emails here or there.  I propose
that we come together in a community-driven way to define when
it's time to say "Welcome!" and when it's time to say, "Get
lost."

I understand that there are valid arguments against posting
guides, not the least of which including what I said above in 2).
Maybe this community doesn't want a posting guide.  OK.  But even
in that case we've at least agreed that we don't want a posting
guide and can get back to work.

If we *do* decide that a minimal posting guide makes sense, then
it wouldn't be of much use unless there are those among us willing
to enforce it when individuals maliciously disregard the
agreement of the community.  I would probably have been one of
those people had I known there was some consensus about what is
OK and what isn't.  Now is the time to decide.


I have a mental "first draft" of things that could go in one, but
there's no point moving forward if there isn't a general feeling
that this would be something good to do.  And, I'd like the Org
old-timers to feel free to take the reins and run with it if they
so choose.

Cheers,

-- 
Jay

[1] http://www.quotes.net/quote/2101
[2] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2013-03/msg00449.html
[3] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2013-03/msg00747.html

-- 
G. Jay Kerns, Ph.D.
Youngstown State University
http://people.ysu.edu/~gkerns/

Re: posting guide?

[Ista Zahn]

+1

On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Jay Kerns <gjkernsysu@gmail.com> wrote:
> The past few days have reminded me of something somebody famous
> once said [1]. I can already see work being done to protect the
> community for the future, yet I believe there is more we might do
> to be even stronger.
>
> I understand and appreciate Bastien's stated position regarding
> moderator controls [2], and in that particular case I think he
> did the right thing. At the same time, I do not possess his
> seemingly superhuman level of patience, temperance, and couth.
>
> Yes, I can add people to my SPAM filter (which I did, BTW), but
> that action protects only *me*.  It does not protect the
> community. Further, my later blissful ignorance means I am
> unavailable to respond to future threats, so malicious
> individuals are left to run rampant and destroy everybody else
> still hanging around.  Of course, if *everybody* agrees to divert
> to SPAM then we're all set.
>
> That's my point: I propose that we, as a community, come to some
> sort of consensus as to what un/acceptable behavior is and an
> accepted mechanism of response.  One way to accomplish this is
> with a posting guide. I have some thoughts about this:
>
> 1. It should be written and maintained by the community. On
> Worg, for instance.
>
> 2. It should be minimal. Posting guides sometimes go overboard,
> to the extent that they can be (and sometimes are) used as a
> weapon.  I do *not* propose that.  If we insist on 1) then I
> trust the community to handle it with care.
>
> 3. It should contain things which help new users draft messages
> that are informative and targeted to whatever problem they're
> having, things they might not have known otherwise (things like
> M-x org-version, M-x toggle-debug-on-error, etc.).
>
> 4. I think we can all agree that messages like this [3] should
> not be tolerated, ever, under any circumstances.  If a person
> resorts to ad hominem attacks of this sort (or similar)
> then (s)he should promptly be shown the door.  Period.  As far as
> I am concerned, that's pretty much the only thing I can't
> stomach, but maybe the larger community considers other subjects
> to be off-topic or unwelcome on the list.  That would be for the
> community to decide.
>
>
> All the above is a long-winded way to say that every community
> has some /minimum/ standards and expectations of conduct,
> otherwise we're just a bunch of people standing around in the
> same (virtual) place.  To date, these expectations have lived
> unspoken or scattered around in emails here or there.  I propose
> that we come together in a community-driven way to define when
> it's time to say "Welcome!" and when it's time to say, "Get
> lost."
>
> I understand that there are valid arguments against posting
> guides, not the least of which including what I said above in 2).
> Maybe this community doesn't want a posting guide.  OK.  But even
> in that case we've at least agreed that we don't want a posting
> guide and can get back to work.
>
> If we *do* decide that a minimal posting guide makes sense, then
> it wouldn't be of much use unless there are those among us willing
> to enforce it when individuals maliciously disregard the
> agreement of the community.  I would probably have been one of
> those people had I known there was some consensus about what is
> OK and what isn't.  Now is the time to decide.
>
>
> I have a mental "first draft" of things that could go in one, but
> there's no point moving forward if there isn't a general feeling
> that this would be something good to do.  And, I'd like the Org
> old-timers to feel free to take the reins and run with it if they
> so choose.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Jay
>
> [1] http://www.quotes.net/quote/2101
> [2] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2013-03/msg00449.html
> [3] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2013-03/msg00747.html
>
> --
> G. Jay Kerns, Ph.D.
> Youngstown State University
> http://people.ysu.edu/~gkerns/
>

Re: posting guide?

[Andreas Röhler]

Am 13.03.2013 20:13, schrieb Jay Kerns:
> The past few days have reminded me of something somebody famous
> once said [1]. I can already see work being done to protect the
> community for the future, yet I believe there is more we might do
> to be even stronger.
>
> I understand and appreciate Bastien's stated position regarding
> moderator controls [2], and in that particular case I think he
> did the right thing. At the same time, I do not possess his
> seemingly superhuman level of patience, temperance, and couth.
>
> Yes, I can add people to my SPAM filter (which I did, BTW), but
> that action protects only *me*.  It does not protect the
> community. Further, my later blissful ignorance means I am
> unavailable to respond to future threats, so malicious
> individuals are left to run rampant and destroy everybody else
> still hanging around.  Of course, if *everybody* agrees to divert
> to SPAM then we're all set.
>
> That's my point: I propose that we, as a community, come to some
> sort of consensus as to what un/acceptable behavior is and an
> accepted mechanism of response.  One way to accomplish this is
> with a posting guide. I have some thoughts about this:

[ ... ]


Hi Jay,

if you permit my opinion as a kind of guest-reader for years: don't think it's needed.
IMO it was an accident. Hopefully the person will recover and present it's
  excuses some weeks or month later.

Expect org-mode users being decent people by virtue of these fine thing themselves.
Really don't assume that might happen next years again.

Best,

Andreas

Re: posting guide?

[Jay Kerns]

Dear Andreas,

On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Andreas Röhler
<andreas.roehler@easy-emacs.de> wrote:

> Hi Jay,
>
> if you permit my opinion as a kind of guest-reader for years: don't think
> it's needed.
> IMO it was an accident. Hopefully the person will recover and present it's
>  excuses some weeks or month later.
>
> Expect org-mode users being decent people by virtue of these fine thing
> themselves.
> Really don't assume that might happen next years again.
>



Of course, I permit your opinion, and thanks for chiming in.  I
personally do not believe that Jambunathan's recent behavior was an
accident, but that is just my opinion.  And I do not hold any ill will
toward the man: I wish him the very best - some place far, far away
(for a while).

As Org grows there will be additional newbies (hopefully hundreds!)
and additional hostile individuals (hopefully epsilon).  Those are the
two categories targeted by this proposal.

-- 
Jay

Re: posting guide?

[Bastien]

Hi Jay,

Jay Kerns <gjkernsysu@gmail.com> writes:

> I have a mental "first draft" of things that could go in one, but
> there's no point moving forward if there isn't a general feeling
> that this would be something good to do.

Well, I would not invest too much time on this, personally.  

From experience, such a drafting process takes a lot of time.  And at
the end, you're not always sure that the whole community comes: to an
agreement... only the ones who care, who are obviously not the ones
the guidelines want to reach.

Why not trying another approach and have a hall of fame for great
posts sent on this lists?  Examples of good/thorough explanations,
example of detailed bug reports, etc.  It would be both encouraging
and educating, maybe.

What do you think?

-- 
 Bastien

Re: posting guide?

[Jay Kerns]

Dear Bastien,


On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Bastien <bzg@altern.org> wrote:
> Hi Jay,

> Well, I would not invest too much time on this, personally.

No, you don't seem to be bothered at all; those attacks seem to
wash off you like water off a duck's back, or scandals off of Bill
Clinton's resume.  ;-)

> From experience, such a drafting process takes a lot of time.  And at
> the end, you're not always sure that the whole community comes: to an
> agreement... only the ones who care, who are obviously not the ones
> the guidelines want to reach.


Drafting takes about five seconds. In fact, let me do one right now:

"Please note that messages to the emacs-orgmode list are expected
to be civil and focused toward our mutual interest of Org
mode. /Ad hominem/ or other attacks of a personal nature will not
be tolerated by the community."

Any strenuous objections?


> Why not trying another approach and have a hall of fame for great
> posts sent on this lists?  Examples of good/thorough explanations,
> example of detailed bug reports, etc.  It would be both encouraging
> and educating, maybe.
>
> What do you think?
>


I think that's a great idea!, actually.  My mental catalogue of
excellent posts probably isn't as extensive as yours, but even
just last night I got a great response that fits a Hall of Fame
in my book. Surely there must be other people who got a great
response to some question they asked at some point in their past.

-- 
Jay

Re: posting guide?

[François Pinard]

Jay Kerns <gjkernsysu@gmail.com> writes:

> As Org grows there will be additional newbies (hopefully hundreds!)
> and additional hostile individuals (hopefully epsilon).  Those are the
> two categories targeted by this proposal.

I sadly have to agree somehow.  The Perl crowd, for example, was warm
and interesting when it began, long ago, before later turning in a
boiling riot and a place to run away from.  The Python crowd is still
not so bad, but it is not anymore the cozy place it was in its
beginnings.  Popularity seemingly comes with a price.  Sigh!  For Org
mode, maybe it is a bit premature, as it is not an urgent matter yet.
Maybe energies could be best invested elsewhere for the time being.

François

Re: posting guide?

[Thomas S. Dye]

Aloha Jay,

Jay Kerns <gjkernsysu@gmail.com> writes:

>
> That's my point: I propose that we, as a community, come to some
> sort of consensus as to what un/acceptable behavior is and an
> accepted mechanism of response.  One way to accomplish this is
> with a posting guide. I have some thoughts about this:
>
> 1. It should be written and maintained by the community. On
> Worg, for instance.

Worg has a brief description of the mailing list, including list
etiquette: 

http://orgmode.org/worg/org-mailing-list.html

It tries to stay away from prescription, and it deliberately avoids
mentioning all the bad behaviors that can be found on mailing lists.

Please feel free to edit so it suits!

All the best,
Tom

-- 
Thomas S. Dye
http://www.tsdye.com

Re: posting guide?

[Jay Kerns]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 973 bytes --]

Dear Tom,

Perfect - that's just what I'm looking for.  And that's exactly what I'll
do.

Cheers,
Jay
On Mar 13, 2013 6:16 PM, "Thomas S. Dye" <tsd@tsdye.com> wrote:

> Aloha Jay,
>
> Jay Kerns <gjkernsysu@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >
> > That's my point: I propose that we, as a community, come to some
> > sort of consensus as to what un/acceptable behavior is and an
> > accepted mechanism of response.  One way to accomplish this is
> > with a posting guide. I have some thoughts about this:
> >
> > 1. It should be written and maintained by the community. On
> > Worg, for instance.
>
> Worg has a brief description of the mailing list, including list
> etiquette:
>
> http://orgmode.org/worg/org-mailing-list.html
>
> It tries to stay away from prescription, and it deliberately avoids
> mentioning all the bad behaviors that can be found on mailing lists.
>
> Please feel free to edit so it suits!
>
> All the best,
> Tom
>
> --
> Thomas S. Dye
> http://www.tsdye.com
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1536 bytes --]

Re: posting guide?

[Bastien]

tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:

> It tries to stay away from prescription, and it deliberately avoids
> mentioning all the bad behaviors that can be found on mailing lists.
>
> Please feel free to edit so it suits!

+1!

-- 
 Bastien

Re: posting guide?

[Bastien]

Hi Jay,

Jay Kerns <gjkernsysu@gmail.com> writes:

> "Please note that messages to the emacs-orgmode list are expected
> to be civil and focused toward our mutual interest of Org
> mode. /Ad hominem/ or other attacks of a personal nature will not
> be tolerated by the community."
>
> Any strenuous objections?

No objection of course, but it feels both formal and empty to me.

> I think that's a great idea!, actually.  My mental catalogue of
> excellent posts probably isn't as extensive as yours, but even
> just last night I got a great response that fits a Hall of Fame
> in my book. Surely there must be other people who got a great
> response to some question they asked at some point in their past.

My memory is called the Org FAQ :)
http://orgmode.org/worg/org-faq.html

-- 
 Bastien

Re: posting guide?

[James Harkins]

Jay Kerns <gjkernsysu <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Yes, I can add people to my SPAM filter (which I did, BTW), but
> that action protects only *me*.  It does not protect the
> community.

It also doesn't protect digest readers such as myself.

I was quite annoyed by Jambunathan's suggestion that individual spam filters 
were the way to deal with his misbehavior, for this reason.

hjh

Re: posting guide?

[Robert Horn]

Bastien writes:

> No objection of course, but it feels both formal and empty to me.
>

I share Bastien's opinion.  My experience with community building is
that describing and rewarding exemplary behavior is much more useful
than attempting to set strict rules of behavior.  You need some basic
rules, but then emphasize describing excellence.

It's much better for people trying be "be like her, because everyone
respects and honors her", rather than following some set of detailed
rules.

R Horn
rjhorn@alum.mit.edu

Re: posting guide?

[Thorsten Jolitz]

Robert Horn <rjhorn@alum.mit.edu> writes:

> It's much better for people trying be "be like her, because everyone
> respects and honors her", rather than following some set of detailed
> rules.

Her??? Who is she?
Never met her on this list ....

-- 
cheers,
Thorsten

Re: posting guide?

[Jay Kerns]

On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Robert Horn <rjhorn@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

>
> I share Bastien's opinion.  My experience with community building is
> that describing and rewarding exemplary behavior is much more useful
> than attempting to set strict rules of behavior.  You need some basic
> rules, but then emphasize describing excellence.
>
> It's much better for people trying be "be like her, because everyone
> respects and honors her", rather than following some set of detailed
> rules.
>
> R Horn
> rjhorn@alum.mit.edu


You know, I don't disagree with any of that.

Re: empty words, in my view, the measure of any statement is the
veracity of the person who says it, or in this case, the resolve
of the community who lives by it.

Or not.  :-)

After having reviewed the paragraph on the Worg page that Tom
mentioned, it is clear that there already exists a
community-driven place to give guidance about what is
considered (un)acceptable behavior on this list.

As promised, I added a sentence to that paragraph: "Ad hominem
comments are out of place and will not be tolerated by the
community."  If one of you feels this is inconsistent with Org's
spirit, feel free to delete my change (it is a wiki, after all).
No hard feelings.  Honest.

Time to get back to work.  Thanks to all who contributed to the
discussion.

-- 
Jay

Re: posting guide?

[Bastien]

Hi Jay,

Jay Kerns <gjkernsysu@gmail.com> writes:

> As promised, I added a sentence to that paragraph: "Ad hominem
> comments are out of place and will not be tolerated by the
> community."  If one of you feels this is inconsistent with Org's
> spirit, feel free to delete my change (it is a wiki, after all).
> No hard feelings.  Honest.

I'm fine with the sentence you added --- and will take care not 
to curse after myself when I make a mistake ;)

-- 
 Bastien

Re: posting guide?

[Rainer M Krug]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1285 bytes --]

Just a short comment:

There is one incident caused by one user - this is an outlier in all
statistical measures. I don't think it is reasonable to react with new rules
- by discussing the issue caused by one user, we are playing by their rules!

 Ignore the one user but keep your eyes and ears open - but don't overreact.


Cheers,

Rainer


On Thursday, March 14, 2013, Bastien wrote:

> Hi Jay,
>
> Jay Kerns <gjkernsysu@gmail.com <javascript:;>> writes:
>
> > As promised, I added a sentence to that paragraph: "Ad hominem
> > comments are out of place and will not be tolerated by the
> > community."  If one of you feels this is inconsistent with Org's
> > spirit, feel free to delete my change (it is a wiki, after all).
> > No hard feelings.  Honest.
>
> I'm fine with the sentence you added --- and will take care not
> to curse after myself when I make a mistake ;)
>
> --
>  Bastien
>
>

-- 
Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation Biology,
UCT), Dipl. Phys. (Germany)

Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology
Stellenbosch University
South Africa

Tel :       +33 - (0)9 53 10 27 44
Cell:       +33 - (0)6 85 62 59 98
Fax (F):       +33 - (0)9 58 10 27 44

Fax (D):    +49 - (0)3 21 21 25 22 44

email:      Rainer@krugs.de

Skype:      RMkrug

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1843 bytes --]

Re: posting guide?

[Carsten Dominik]

On 13 mrt. 2013, at 22:07, Jay Kerns <gjkernsysu@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Bastien,
> 
> 
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Bastien <bzg@altern.org> wrote:
>> Hi Jay,
> 
>> Well, I would not invest too much time on this, personally.
> 
> No, you don't seem to be bothered at all; those attacks seem to
> wash off you like water off a duck's back, or scandals off of Bill
> Clinton's resume.  ;-)
> 
>> From experience, such a drafting process takes a lot of time.  And at
>> the end, you're not always sure that the whole community comes: to an
>> agreement... only the ones who care, who are obviously not the ones
>> the guidelines want to reach.
> 
> 
> Drafting takes about five seconds. In fact, let me do one right now:
> 
> "Please note that messages to the emacs-orgmode list are expected
> to be civil and focused toward our mutual interest of Org
> mode. /Ad hominem/ or other attacks of a personal nature will not
> be tolerated by the community."
> 
> Any strenuous objections?

Hi,

it seems to me that this is entirely superfluous.  I have not seen a mailing lit with better behavior anywhere.  We should not be distracted by a lone user.


> 
> 
>> Why not trying another approach and have a hall of fame for great
>> posts sent on this lists?  Examples of good/thorough explanations,
>> example of detailed bug reports, etc.  It would be both encouraging
>> and educating, maybe.
>> 
>> What do you think?
>> 

A great idea.

- Carsten

> 
> 
> I think that's a great idea!, actually.  My mental catalogue of
> excellent posts probably isn't as extensive as yours, but even
> just last night I got a great response that fits a Hall of Fame
> in my book. Surely there must be other people who got a great
> response to some question they asked at some point in their past.
> 
> -- 
> Jay
> 

Re: posting guide?

[Memnon Anon]

> it seems to me that this is entirely superfluous. I have not seen a
> mailing lit with better behavior anywhere. We should not be distracted
> by a lone user.

FWIW, +1

Re: posting guide?

[Bernt Hansen]

Memnon Anon <gegendosenfleisch@googlemail.com> writes:

>> it seems to me that this is entirely superfluous. I have not seen a
>> mailing lit with better behavior anywhere. We should not be distracted
>> by a lone user.
>
> FWIW, +1

+2 :)

Bernt

Re: posting guide?

[Jay Kerns]

[snip]

>> FWIW, +1
>
> +2 :)
>

Fair enough.  I agree that time shouldn't be wasted on lone users, and
that includes me:

http://orgmode.org/w/?p=worg.git;a=commitdiff;h=933d17d268a1618d9244c12014403a05c05c5a25

Cheers,

-- 
Jay

Re: posting guide?

[Jay Kerns]

Reading my message again, it doesn't say what I wanted it to say, and
it sounds in my head not in the way I wanted it to sound.  Let me try
again, with more words:

That's totally fine by me, I meant it when I said "OK if you don't
want to do that", and I don't want a silly thing like a posting guide
idea of mine to be wasting people's time any more than I want
malicious comments from hostile lone users to be wasting people's
time.

I hope that sounds better; it is closer to what I meant.

Sorry for the noise,

-- 
Jay

Re: posting guide?

[Carsten Dominik]

On 14.3.2013, at 20:53, Jay Kerns <gjkernsysu@gmail.com> wrote:

> Reading my message again, it doesn't say what I wanted it to say, and
> it sounds in my head not in the way I wanted it to sound.  Let me try
> again, with more words:
> 
> That's totally fine by me, I meant it when I said "OK if you don't
> want to do that", and I don't want a silly thing like a posting guide
> idea of mine to be wasting people's time any more than I want
> malicious comments from hostile lone users to be wasting people's
> time.
> 
> I hope that sounds better; it is closer to what I meant.

Sure!

However, the idea in the thread to collect a few exemplary
post with great questions or great answers could be fun...

Cheers

- Carsten

> 
> Sorry for the noise,
> 
> -- 
> Jay
>