So this means ignoring any concerns and pressing on regardless?
Which concerns would have been ignored?
[...]
Regards,
--
MJR/slef
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
MJ Ray writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> MJ Ray writes:
>>> So this means ignoring any concerns and pressing on regardless?
>> Disagreeing with you is not the same thing as ignoring concerns.
>> Making that accusation is a cheap debate tactic. Without mind-reading,
>> you have no idea whether
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 12:40:24PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Jurij Smakov wrote:
> > The 'mailvoting' alioth project [0] has been created. There are also
> > two mailing lists, 'mailvoting-discuss' and 'mailvoting-devel', for
> > general discussion and implementation discussion, respectively. Pleas
Russ Allbery wrote:
> MJ Ray writes:
> > So this means ignoring any concerns and pressing on regardless?
>
> Disagreeing with you is not the same thing as ignoring concerns. Making
> that accusation is a cheap debate tactic. Without mind-reading, you have
> no idea whether someone is ignoring y
MJ Ray writes:
> So this means ignoring any concerns and pressing on regardless?
Disagreeing with you is not the same thing as ignoring concerns. Making
that accusation is a cheap debate tactic. Without mind-reading, you have
no idea whether someone is ignoring your concerns or just continuing
* MJ Ray [Fri, 16 Jan 2009 12:40:24 +]:
> What's a rant about zionism got to do with this? Is it spam?
> If so, why didn't the list admin block it?
It took me a bit to figure out that you meant [1].
[1]:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/mailvoting-devel/2009-January/00.html
Jurij Smakov wrote:
> The 'mailvoting' alioth project [0] has been created. There are also
> two mailing lists, 'mailvoting-discuss' and 'mailvoting-devel', for
> general discussion and implementation discussion, respectively. Please
> subscribe [1] to them, if you are interested in contributin
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 06:05:09PM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
>
> Another point is that most people are probably going to be pretty busy
> with holiday stuff over the last couple of weeks (I'm leaving for a
> two-week vacation myself tomorrow), so we'll have to get back to
> implementation deta
On Monday 05 January 2009 12:17:42 MJ Ray wrote:
--cut--
> There are already crude mechanisms (reply privately, reply publicly,
> report abuse and so on) but they are social more than technical.
Agruably, these mechanisms don't reveal the big picture to the society (i.e.
what people think about s
Nick Phillips wrote:
> On 22/12/2008, at 9:42 PM, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Show me the numbers. I believe that the current "silent majority" is
> > by definition silent and most of it will continue to be silent,
> > watching lists just in case something useful appears and refusing to
> > participate in
On 22/12/2008, at 9:42 PM, MJ Ray wrote:
George Danchev wrote:
On Saturday 20 December 2008 21:33:27 MJ Ray wrote:
So, people who remain on the debian mailing lists have a poor
understanding of what should appear a good mailing list,
What makes you think that "vocal minority" is larger tha
Thanks for writing to my email address; I'm not subscribed to the list as you
may have realized.
Le December 29, 2008 06:59:30 am MJ Ray, vous avez écrit :
> Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> > MJ Ray wrote:
> > > I consider filtered indices, auto-responses, shadow lists of only
> > > "good" messages, h
Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> MJ Ray wrote:
> > I consider filtered indices, auto-responses, shadow lists of only
> > "good" messages, highlighting, integration with db.debian.org and some
> > of the other uses for this data to be recommendation systems.
> >
> A filtered thread index as proposed is
MJ Ray wrote:
Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> > Various messages in this thread have suggested using the votes as the
> > basis of a recommendation system for messages or authors.
> Ah, do you consider a "filtered thread index" as a recommendation list?
> Else what do you consider as a recommendation
Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> > Various messages in this thread have suggested using the votes as the
> > basis of a recommendation system for messages or authors.
> Ah, do you consider a "filtered thread index" as a recommendation list?
> Else what do you consider as a recommendation list?
Please t
George Danchev wrote: [...]
> Well, I assume that the vote is a personal human right and that is common for
> all the cultures out there (including regimes, since these peers are Debian
> citizens after all, if any ?). So anyone can vote on his/her own. I believe
> that is quite valid assumptio
Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> > I see that http://www.grouplens.org has moved on and their research
> > (like http://www.grouplens.org/node/126 - "The recommendations that
> > are most accurate according to the standard metrics are sometimes not
> > the recommendations that are most useful to users"
Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> > I see that http://www.grouplens.org has moved on and their research
> > (like http://www.grouplens.org/node/126 - "The recommendations that
> > are most accurate according to the standard metrics are sometimes not
> > the recommendations that are most useful to users")
Filipus Klutiero wrote: [...]
> I'm not aware of any software with such a feature that would fit for
> Debian. I also couldn't find any in a quick search. [...]
It sounded a lot like the old GroupLens usenet tool to me.
http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/gnus/GroupLens.html
Th
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:47:41 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> So, are there going to be guide;lines for this voting on emails?
> On /., when one moderates, there are clear labels: troll, off-topic,
> flamebait, etc.
I think labels or tags would indeed be useful to have a structured
way
On Monday 22 December 2008 07:47:41 Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> So, are there going to be guide;lines for this voting on emails?
I'm afraid that I'm not able answer such a question, but I can try to provide
a contra-argument (just to prove it wrong or maybe right) -- if we follo
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 01:49:44AM +, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> > * "Vocal minority" dominates "silent majority" by contributing a
> > disproportionate amount of list traffic, [...]
>
> Note that voting can have a similar drawback -
Le Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 01:31:31AM -0500, Filipus Klutiero a écrit :
> A long exchange between two people can be interesting, or not.
Hi Filipus,
it is exactly because it can not be known if a long exchange is interesting
before reading it that tools to ignore long exchanges can be useful. The me
Filipus Klutiero wrote: [...]
> I'm not aware of any software with such a feature that would fit for
> Debian. I also couldn't find any in a quick search. [...]
It sounded a lot like the old GroupLens usenet tool to me.
http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/gnus/GroupLens.html
The b
George Danchev wrote:
> On Saturday 20 December 2008 21:33:27 MJ Ray wrote:
> > So, people who remain on the debian mailing lists have a poor
> > understanding of what should appear a good mailing list,
>
> What makes you think that "vocal minority" is larger than "silent majority"
> in
> debia
Note that voting can have a similar drawback -- in that if you've got
enough like-minded people voting for a particular viewpoint (eg, "Joe
Random sucks, give him what for!") people with a different viewpoint
(eg, "stop berating people, argh") aren't going to bother voting ("the
score's already +
Just to add to the brainstorm, an incremental counter measuring how many emails
one person sent to the list in a 24-h window could be very useful to directly
ignore people when they start to play ping-pong.
I doubt it. I'd like to see evidence that posting patterns can
efficiently estimate the i
Hi,
So, are there going to be guide;lines for this voting on emails?
On /., when one moderates, there are clear labels: troll, off-topic,
flamebait, etc. When we put in voting, would there be some guidelines
for what is or is not acceptable criteria for disapproving a message?
It would be great to see voting/scoring/rating of messages implemented.
Like Russ, I doubt that implementing this would be worth it inside the
email paradigm. Whatever approach you choose, keep in mind Debian is
only one of the projects that could benefit from such a system. I admit
I'm not aw
On Sunday 21 December 2008 23:12:08 Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> > Now, I know that for a bunch of geeks like us it is very tempting to
> > start discussing the technical details and how the scoring is
> > going to be implemented, and how t
Steve Langasek writes:
> To reiterate my point from IRC Friday, I don't think the described
> system is at all useful *unless* we agree on a means by which strong
> community disapproval of the poster's mails has consequences for
> that person's posting privileges. I think by this point, the peop
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> Now, I know that for a bunch of geeks like us it is very tempting to
> start discussing the technical details and how the scoring is
> going to be implemented, and how the results are going to be used,
> and so on. The way I would
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> > * "Vocal minority" dominates "silent majority" by contributing a
> > disproportionate amount of list traffic, [...]
>
> Note that voting can have a similar drawback -- in that if you've g
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 05:41:48PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > m, this is risky and an important point: do we want the
> > information to be publicly available or not? The initial proposal
> The initial mail said that clearly at least: “which simply collects
> the data and makes it pu
On Sunday 21 December 2008 03:49:44 Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> > * "Vocal minority" dominates "silent majority" by contributing a
> > disproportionate amount of list traffic, [...]
>
> Note that voting can have a similar drawback -- in tha
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> * "Vocal minority" dominates "silent majority" by contributing a
> disproportionate amount of list traffic, [...]
Note that voting can have a similar drawback -- in that if you've got
enough like-minded people voting for a particular
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 09:38:56AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> George Danchev writes:
>
> > On Saturday 20 December 2008 21:33:27 MJ Ray wrote:
> > > So, people who remain on the debian mailing lists have a poor
> > > understanding of what should appear a good mailing list,
> >
> > What makes you
George Danchev writes:
> On Saturday 20 December 2008 21:33:27 MJ Ray wrote:
> > So, people who remain on the debian mailing lists have a poor
> > understanding of what should appear a good mailing list,
>
> What makes you think that "vocal minority" is larger than "silent
> majority" in debian
Florian Weimer writes:
> * MJ Ray:
>
>> Jurij Smakov wrote: [...]
>>> So, what can we do about? During a little brainstorming session on IRC
>>> last night a following idea has emerged: let's have a way to express
>>> our opinion about the mailing list posts. [...]
>>
>> So, people who remain
* MJ Ray:
> Jurij Smakov wrote: [...]
>> So, what can we do about? During a little brainstorming session on IRC
>> last night a following idea has emerged: let's have a way to express
>> our opinion about the mailing list posts. [...]
>
> So, people who remain on the debian mailing lists have a
On Saturday 20 December 2008 21:33:27 MJ Ray wrote:
> Jurij Smakov wrote: [...]
>
> > So, what can we do about? During a little brainstorming session on IRC
> > last night a following idea has emerged: let's have a way to express
> > our opinion about the mailing list posts. [...]
>
> So, people w
Jurij Smakov wrote: [...]
> So, what can we do about? During a little brainstorming session on IRC
> last night a following idea has emerged: let's have a way to express
> our opinion about the mailing list posts. [...]
So, people who remain on the debian mailing lists have a poor
understanding
Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
>> It is generally perceived that there are currently a couple of
>> problems with the way discussions happen on our mailing lists:
> I'm not sure yet if I like the idea, but for sure it is an intriguing
>
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 05:02:23PM +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 10:35:14 +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
>
> > I believe that at this point Nick Rusnov, John Goerzen and myself have
> > expressed interest in working on the first stage of the project. If
> > you have any ideas or
Le Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 07:12:15PM +0200, Teemu Likonen a écrit :
>
> Maybe even add an additional header to mailing-list posts, like
> "X-Debian-Author-Karma: +234". OK, maybe not. It's not terribly reliable
> on public mailing lists because users can change their From addresses as
> they want. B
Raphael Hertzog (2008-12-20 17:41 +0100) wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2008, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> seemed to be more oriented to scoring single posts, while here you
>> are kind of inheriting a score on the poster from his posts. They are
>> two quite different approaches.
>
> They are different
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> [ re-ordering the quoted text, anticipating your reply to my post ]
>
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 04:35:43PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > The goal is not (necessarily to) filter the messages that we want to
> > see or not, the goal is to give fee
[ re-ordering the quoted text, anticipating your reply to my post ]
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 04:35:43PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> The goal is not (necessarily to) filter the messages that we want to
> see or not, the goal is to give feedback to contributors so that
> they know if their messag
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 10:35:14 +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> I believe that at this point Nick Rusnov, John Goerzen and myself have
> expressed interest in working on the first stage of the project. If
> you have any ideas or comments - please share, we would also welcome
> your contribution if yo
Hello,
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> and so on. The way I would like to see this idea developing is that it
> starts as an unofficial project, with very simple rules (like, "you
> can vote once for each message ID"), which simply collects the data
> and makes it publicly available
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> It is generally perceived that there are currently a couple of
> problems with the way discussions happen on our mailing lists:
I'm not sure yet if I like the idea, but for sure it is an intriguing
one, thanks for pushing it through!
Hi,
It is generally perceived that there are currently a couple of
problems with the way discussions happen on our mailing lists:
* Some people are put off from participating in the discussions
on important topics because they are not willing to expose themselves
to offensive behaviour and per
52 matches
Mail list logo
