Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03E8D25A; Sun, 9 Oct 2016 10:31:33 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 00:05:01 by SQLgrey-1.7.6 X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-3.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-3.mit.edu [18.9.25.14]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46D837C; Sun, 9 Oct 2016 10:31:33 +0000 (UTC) X-AuditID: 1209190e-f3bff70000007dac-dd-57fa1b56b5d2 Received: from mailhub-auth-2.mit.edu ( [18.7.62.36]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 8F.47.32172.65B1AF75; Sun, 9 Oct 2016 06:26:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-2.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id u99AQTpq031072; Sun, 9 Oct 2016 06:26:30 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-f180.google.com (mail-io0-f180.google.com [209.85.223.180]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as jlrubin@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id u99AQSGO024171 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sun, 9 Oct 2016 06:26:29 -0400 Received: by mail-io0-f180.google.com with SMTP id r30so85785542ioi.1; Sun, 09 Oct 2016 03:26:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9Rnct8K4F7zZa/h94FfDF4jm2kO1+wN26bqpSqfMNrMTaGCPijV01pG7CJDB/mWkgQlicjJAYCAt1bH91g== X-Received: by 10.107.197.69 with SMTP id v66mr27103747iof.119.1476008788030; Sun, 09 Oct 2016 03:26:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.36.0.197 with HTTP; Sun, 9 Oct 2016 03:26:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeremy Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 12:26:07 +0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Bitcoin development mailing list Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c189b967f01a3053e6c1318 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprHKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixG6nohsu/SvcYOEsEYum17YWzVOmsTsw efz+MZkxgDGKyyYlNSezLLVI3y6BK2N/W2RBv03F809PmRoYF5h0MXJySAiYSDzfupS5i5GL Q0igjUmi5cgSJghnA6PE62uzGSGc40wSs27sYARpERIolbi3YjMbRHuOxLMtH1gg7FKJVV8P MIPYvAKCEidnPmGBqPeQ+P1gOpDNwcEmICfx4ZcpiMkioCLxupMLxJQQSJRYelcRojFA4vXE 16wgtrCArsSve0+ZQGwRAR+JleeXgR3ADBQ/dP0XE4TtJfH79XG2CYyCs5DsnYUkNQtoA7OA usT6eUIQYTWJ29uuskPY2hLLFr5mXsDIuopRNiW3Sjc3MTOnODVZtzg5MS8vtUjXWC83s0Qv NaV0EyMouDkl+XYwTmrwPsQowMGoxMN7weJnuBBrYllxZe4hRkkOJiVR3sQTP8KF+JLyUyoz Eosz4otKc1KLDzFKcDArifAeEv0VLsSbklhZlVqUD5OS5mBREuf97/Y1XEggPbEkNTs1tSC1 CCYrw8GhJMF7XhKoUbAoNT21Ii0zpwQhzcTBCTKcB2i4rBTI8OKCxNzizHSI/ClGS451M66t ZeLY8htEbpt6by2TEEtefl6qlDhvJ8hQAZCGjNI8uJmgZHUx9P6WV4ziQC8K82aAjOUBJjq4 qa+AFjIBLWRZ/ANkYUkiQkqqgdEw8Wwazwu/G0JTVHfOFVlrf0b69mS/HTz1OrFBkfn1ovbP OlpPqU8Jue+6+8i9zUph3wt2erjfPhihtvnknn2O00wU+qo/JVwPjXv18pNzUdhSOccgw6// HoofD1x1e61L1aXj1Vv+52mclpM54h6t/qFDlfF8YL4ai9j1wD9hvj/zZwSvblViKc5INNRi LipOBADz/SNaMQMAAA== X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: bitcoin-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: [bitcoin-dev] 1 Year bitcoin-dev Moderation Review X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2016 10:31:34 -0000 --94eb2c189b967f01a3053e6c1318 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi bitcoin-dev, I'm well aware that discussion of moderation on bitcoin-dev is discouraged*. However, I think that we should, as a year of moderation approaches, discuss openly as a community what the impact of such policy has been. Making such a post now is timely given that people will have the opportunity to discuss in-person as well as online as Scaling Bitcoin is currently underway. On the suggestion of others, I've also CC'd bitcoin-discuss on this message. Below, I'll share some of my own personal thoughts as a starter, but would love to hear others feelings as well. For me, the bitcoin-dev mailing list was a place where I started frequenting to learn a lot about bitcoin and the development process and interact with the community. Since moderation has begun, it seems that the messages/day has dropped drastically. This may be a nice outcome overall for our sanity, but I think that it has on the whole made the community less accessible. I've heard from people (a > 1 number, myself included) that they now self-censor because they think they will put a lot of work into their email only for it to get moderated away as trolling/spam. Thus, while we may not observe a high rate of moderated posts, it does mean the "chilling effect" of moderation still manifests -- I think that people not writing emails because they think it may be moderated reduces the rate of people writing emails which is a generally valuable thing as it offers people a vehicle through which they try to think through and communicate their ideas in detail. Overall, I think that at the time that moderation was added to the list, it was probably the right thing to do. We're in a different place as a community now, so I feel we should attempt to open up this valuable communication channel once again. My sentiment is that we enacted moderation to protect a resource that we all felt was valuable, but in the process, the value of the list was damaged, but not irreparably so. Best, Jeremy * From the email introducing the bitcoin-dev moderation policy, "Generally discouraged: shower thoughts, wild speculation, jokes, +1s, non-technical bitcoin issues, rehashing settled topics without new data, moderation concerns." -- @JeremyRubin --94eb2c189b967f01a3053e6c1318 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi bitcoin-dev,
<= div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif= ;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
I'm well aware that discussion of moderation on bitcoin-dev is di= scouraged*. However, I think that we should, as a year of moderation approa= ches, discuss openly as a community what the impact of such policy has been= . Making such a post now is timely given that people will have the opportun= ity to discuss in-person as well as online as Scaling Bitcoin is currently = underway. On the suggestion of others, I've also CC'd bitcoin-discu= ss on this message.

Below, I'll share some of my own person= al thoughts as a starter, but would love to hear others feelings as well.

For me, the bitcoin-dev mailing list was a place where I started= frequenting to learn a lot about bitcoin and the development process and i= nteract with the community. Since moderation has begun, it seems that the m= essages/day has dropped drastically. This may be a nice outcome overall for= our sanity, but I think that it has on the whole made the community less a= ccessible. I've heard from people (a > 1 number, myself included) th= at they now self-censor because they think they will put a lot of work into= their email only for it to get moderated away as trolling/spam. Thus, whil= e we may not observe a high rate of moderated posts, it does mean the "= ;chilling effect" of moderation still manifests -- I think that people= not writing emails because they think it may be moderated reduces the rate= of people writing emails which is a generally valuable thing as it offers = people a vehicle through which they try to think through and communicate th= eir ideas in detail.

Overall, I think that at the time that mod= eration was added to the list, it was probably the right thing to do. We= 9;re in a different place as a community now, so I feel we should attempt t= o open up this valuable communication channel once again. My sentiment is t= hat we enacted moderation to protect a resource that we all felt was valuab= le, but in the process, the value of the list was damaged, but not irrepara= bly so.

Best,

Jeremy


* From the email introducing the bitcoin-dev mo= deration policy, "Generally discouraged: shower thoughts, wild sp= eculation, jokes, +1s,=C2=A0non-technical bitcoin issues, rehas= hing settled topics without new=C2=A0data,=C2=A0moderation=C2=A0concerns."


--94eb2c189b967f01a3053e6c1318--