1 |
"Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <hkBst@g.o> posted |
2 |
4A02A0E7.5050500@g.o, excerpted below, on Thu, 07 May 2009 |
3 |
10:50:47 +0200: |
4 |
|
5 |
> Duncan wrote: |
6 |
>> Plus, as I said, with a pre-arrangement, it's possible to do email |
7 |
>> reasonably close to real-time as well, close enough they'd not have |
8 |
>> time to look it up unless they had /some/ idea what was going on. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> What good is simulating real-time chat with email? |
11 |
|
12 |
No simulation, simply ping-ponging close enough to real time via email |
13 |
that there's no need for IRC. |
14 |
|
15 |
> If you prefer not to use IRC most of the time, fine. Refusing to use IRC |
16 |
> when it is clearly the superior tool, that's just dumb. So then I guess |
17 |
> you are arguing email is better for this, right? |
18 |
|
19 |
Not better, but different, and comparable enough that it's not worth |
20 |
losing a potentially valuable contributor over the difference. Some |
21 |
people have just never felt comfortable with IRC, others find it |
22 |
indispensible. Different strokes for different folks as they say, |
23 |
certainly not something worth losing a dev over. True, it works both |
24 |
ways to some degree, but when it's volunteers you are working with, and |
25 |
there's any number of other projects they could be contributing to |
26 |
instead, if one requires something they're not comfortable with, that one |
27 |
likely lost out for what's long term view something ridiculously trivial. |
28 |
|
29 |
> What's so bad about the real-time nature of IRC anyways? That's just |
30 |
> like having a genuine face-to-face conversation. Are those bad too? To |
31 |
> be avoided at all costs? What problem are we solving here again? |
32 |
|
33 |
Nothing bad about it. Some folks are just more comfortable using other |
34 |
comms methods. |
35 |
|
36 |
<sigh> I hadn't intended to get personal, simply state an opinion and |
37 |
clarify a position, but perhaps some personal specifics will help. Or |
38 |
maybe they won't, but WTH, it's worth the effort... |
39 |
|
40 |
Unlike "the texting generation"[1], I've simply found I don't do well |
41 |
with instant text. I deliberate over my sentences too much, go back and |
42 |
rewrite, occasionally lookup words I'm using to ensure the meaning or |
43 |
spelling is correct, etc. In a one-on-one, the other end ends up sitting |
44 |
there staring at a blank screen for minutes at a time, then replies in |
45 |
seconds. That's a waste of their time and a discomfort to me, as I |
46 |
realize the mismatch. In a many-to-many, unlike say a dozen separate |
47 |
voice conversations in a crowded room, I simply don't have the skill |
48 |
others have obviously perfected of separating out the individual desired |
49 |
threads from the "noise" in real-time, tho I can of course with a bit of |
50 |
effort "pore over"[2] an IRC log and regenerate the conversation |
51 |
virtually, after the fact, as I regularly do with the council meeting |
52 |
logs, for instance. But real-time text in pretty much any form simply |
53 |
doesn't work well for me, and I'm uncomfortable with it as a result. |
54 |
Sure, given time and effort that would likely change, to some degree, but |
55 |
honestly, there's far better yields for the same time and effort |
56 |
elsewhere. Obviously, it's not something the texting generation can |
57 |
easily understand, thus this discussion. |
58 |
|
59 |
I've seen a few replies from the (rare) Gentoo dev as well, indicating |
60 |
they basically don't do IRC either, just mail, tho it is quite rare, and |
61 |
it would seem, likely to go extinct in Gentoo before its time, since |
62 |
evidently those devs have no skills considered worth recruiting any |
63 |
more. I'd call that a shame as that's a potentially large skills and |
64 |
talent bank Gentoo's about to pass on, but what's a man to do, other than |
65 |
make the point as best he can? <shrug> |
66 |
|
67 |
[1] "The texting generation": loosely described, not necessarily a |
68 |
specific generation, more a level of comfort with a specific form of |
69 |
technology, tho it's presumably more common in say the under-30 crowd |
70 |
than the over-40, even among developers and the otherwise technically |
71 |
literate. |
72 |
|
73 |
[2] "Pore over": lookup case in point. FWIW I had it right, "pore not |
74 |
pour". =:^) |
75 |
|
76 |
-- |
77 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
78 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
79 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |