To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>, bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@gmail.com>
References: <CADm_WcYnq5sk=wdhqx5UysyS=fu7kRUrixOJC=QfoY5np1ATmA@mail.gmail.com>
	<201510150017.37007.luke@dashjr.org>
From: odinn <odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net>
Message-ID: <561EF60F.9030304@riseup.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 00:40:47 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <201510150017.37007.luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposed list moderation policy and conduct
Precedence: list

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512


I am concerned that someone will always call "off topic" regardless of
how on-topic something actually is.  There is no objective measure of
on-topicness here (or hasn't been) unless we say it has to do with
bitcoin development.

If you say, "Conversations should remain focused and on-topic," as you
have suggested, then presumably you mean, as has also been suggested
in the proposed list moderation policy and conduct document, that we

"aim to facilitate constructive discussion
of issues related to technical development of the bitcoin protocol and
the Bitcoin Core reference implementation"

and thus, that "on-topic" conversations would necessarily be "related
to technical development of the bitcoin protocol and the Bitcoin Core
reference implementation."

Unfortunately, while that is fairly specific to what this list is
about, I think it still will result in a lot of people shouting "Off
Topic!" whenever someone mentions something that might even be
remotely and slightly off the the range.  Thus, I don't think the
current language in the proposed list moderation policy and conduct
document is really that good, and needs much more discussion and
refinement before, well, anything.  It would be a shame if every time
someone brings up something innovative, new or wonderful, or explores
something on the boundaries, they are shouted down with cries of "Off
Topic!" Which, by the way, I see happening A Lot on this list.

Specifically relating to the subject of Disclosure,
It is suggested that people here
"*Disclose potential conflicts*"

"1. List discussions often involve interested parties. We expect
participants to be aware when they are conflicted due to employment or
other projects they are involved in, and disclose those interests to
other project members.
2. When in doubt, over-disclose. Perceived conflicts of interest are
important to address, so that the lists’ decisions are credible even
when unpopular, difficult or favorable to the interests of one group
over another."

I don't doubt that this is a fine plan, but those who work for three
letter agencies or have simply signed NDAs (as an example) aren't
going to disclose anything, nada ~ but will be here anyway, pushing
their personal interests.  Reality.

Looking forward to discussion.

Cheers,

O

Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev:
> On Thursday, October 15, 2015 12:02:21 AM Jeff Garzik via
> bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> 2. If someone asks for help it is because they need it. Politely
>> suggest specific documentation or more appropriate venues where
>> appropriate. Avoid aggressive or vague responses.
> 
> This could get noisy. Clarification that only *development* help is
>  appropriate for the list would improve it.
> 
>> 2. Conversations should remain focused and on-topic. If you must
>> change the topic, start a new thread by changing the topic line
>> of your emails.
> 
> Probably should note that entirely new threads should be new
> messages, *not* merely a reply with a changed topic (as changing
> the topic does not in fact start a new thread).
> 
>> 4. Off-topic threads will be directed to other venues.
> 
> Threads like this one are off-topic, yet we have no obvious other
> venue for it.. :(
> 
>> *Disclose potential conflicts*
> 
> IMO this seems like not only a waste of time, but also futile for
> anyone not exclusively associated with a single
> company/organization.
> 
>> If you have concerns about someone’s conduct: * *On-list*:
>> discussing conduct on-list, either as part of another message or
>> as a standalone thread, is always acceptable.
> 
> Please no. This is off-topic noise.
> 
> Luke _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev
> mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org 
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> 

- -- 
http://abis.io ~
"a protocol concept to enable decentralization
and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
https://keybase.io/odinn
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWHvYPAAoJEGxwq/inSG8C/AgIAKxEOZpQ5O7cdAGcBceE840d
1Jv29kfErv/+vuasCumbF6yCRljJGqeU/t7YmoWcQzSD5jijBbZ7uB7yXBsoJwyg
xELeEAzV2t7v7zLxi569xVKvdaMrIYvwPB2uOQsfmqZ2+PrSlBsRIhcgB9zeuVyK
5Mtb0cHJx7aDmBhhC4r1IQGNfa8zzfdsNU4BqHR2/l6NmH29p9tb7DPC+83O6xY+
ODn6gDRAFsjC+Cy3gsLNf1J4hEvGOkkSVMJIHEmkdJx2gN306rbc7X7DK7CSQX3E
vmhAmDj419dpTvciOEjuiROGDhawPnBsO37UZJIVC/6yWe4sDk5JvQULU2HiyDo=
=T4vL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----