Who maintains ruby-talk?
in [Ruby]
|
Prev: how can i add tones to my pc's sound card
Next: Undefined method `ire' with rubygems on mswin32
From: Peter Hickman on 15 Apr 2010 07:05 [Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.] As annoying as thunk was he appears to have gone. I had forgotten about him already. If thats your worst example then I think we can live without a 'posting czar'. Same with spam, there is very little of that on the list. Chill, it's not as bad as you think.
From: Robert Klemme on 15 Apr 2010 08:01 2010/4/15 Dylan Northrup <docx(a)io.com>: > If you believe having a moderator (or group of moderators) will > make the list a tool of control by the dictator(s) at the top, your belief > goes against the vast majority of historical examples of moderated e-mail > lists. Maybe I want to continue to believe that the Ruby community is special - at least in some ways (for example, because it does not need moderation). You might call that "romantic" (which I believe I am generally not) but you would have to concede that it has worked out remarkably good for the longest time. If you argue with a recent hiccup in favor of getting rid of a tradition then this is a weak argument in my eyes. Kind regards robert -- remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/
From: Robert Dober on 15 Apr 2010 08:32 On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 7:45 AM, Robert Klemme <shortcutter(a)googlemail.com> wrote: <snip> >> As a poster and quite nonconformist I will always step on some folk's >> toe. If there were a moderator I probably could not. > > That should make you wary of moderation, shouldn't it? Honestly I really do not know. I have this tendency to see everyone's arguments, I see Tony's I see your's, I guess I need a mind of my own, anyone having one to spare ;). Seriously I believe much in liberty of expression thus I kind of like my second thought to have a filtered condensed version rather than a moderation. Cheers R. -- The best way to predict the future is to invent it. -- Alan Kay
From: Aldric Giacomoni on 15 Apr 2010 08:48 Robert Klemme wrote: > > Maybe I want to continue to believe that the Ruby community is special > - at least in some ways (for example, because it does not need > moderation). You might call that "romantic" (which I believe I am > generally not) but you would have to concede that it has worked out > remarkably good for the longest time. If you argue with a recent > hiccup in favor of getting rid of a tradition then this is a weak > argument in my eyes. I have the same point of view as Robert. I like 'us'. Ruby-talk, in my eyes, does not need moderation. There is a difference between: - holding back a joke because it is inappropriate - holding back a joke because one would get banned I also realize it's not -exactly- the kind of moderation you meant, but there's a small step from one to the other. I gave thunk his own forum. All he wanted was a place to write stuff on the internet. He can yell as loud as he wants over there; he is even the admin. He is not evil, just misguided. Ever notice how the worst children will suddenly become great kids when they get a toy they like? (damn - my analogy breaks down again. When they get bored, they become 'terrible' kids again!) When ruby-talk grows further, there may be a need for moderation - but without a pattern, I think we may be jumping the gun. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
From: James Britt on 15 Apr 2010 12:35
Peter Hickman wrote: > As annoying as thunk was he appears to have gone. I had forgotten about him > already. > > If thats your worst example then I think we can live without a 'posting > czar'. Same with spam, there is very little of that on the list. > > Chill, it's not as bad as you think. Indeed. Threads about spam/troll problems tend to overwhelm the actual spam/troll problem. -- James Britt www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys www.ruby-doc.org - Ruby Help & Documentation www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff www.neurogami.com - Smart application development |