From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jay Kerns Subject: posting guide? Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:13:08 -0400 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53689) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFr7F-0003me-Ci for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:13:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFr7A-0003vQ-V3 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:13:33 -0400 Received: from mail-qe0-f53.google.com ([209.85.128.53]:58675) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFr7A-0003vK-R1 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:13:28 -0400 Received: by mail-qe0-f53.google.com with SMTP id cz11so807395qeb.26 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:13:28 -0700 (PDT) List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Org Mode List 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/