| 1 |
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 02:15:22AM +0100, Roy Marples wrote: |
| 2 |
> As an ex site/forum admin (non Gentoo) I really have to ask what kind of |
| 3 |
> "quality assurance" you're dealing with here. |
| 4 |
Our current procedure is that we think quite a lot about whom to make |
| 5 |
moderator and whom not. This procedure has never been written down, so |
| 6 |
theoretically one of the admins _could_ make some random asshat with 4 posts |
| 7 |
administrator as well. Writing down the procedure should keep |
| 8 |
something from that from happening. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> Are we talking profane language or just about moving a post of "how do I |
| 11 |
> install do xyz" to the right forum? |
| 12 |
You may want to take a look at the current version of the forum |
| 13 |
guide: http://curtis119.no-ip.org/forum-guide.xml |
| 14 |
People get upset about being treated unfair pretty fast [1] and |
| 15 |
every deleted post raises the conspiracy thread level by 1, so having |
| 16 |
clear rules where to move a post may be more important than you |
| 17 |
think. ;-) |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
[1] http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-341099.html |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> And I do have to ask - what information flow? At the most, Gentoo devs |
| 22 |
> read the forum and post there. After that, forum users have to contact |
| 23 |
> devs via IRC or b.g.o - at best both parties have to read the forums or |
| 24 |
> use IRC, at present people post bugs to get attention. I fail to see how |
| 25 |
> forums can improve the "information flow" when a vast proportion of devs |
| 26 |
> don't even read the forums. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I think it's pretty clear, b.g.o is for bugs and forums for |
| 29 |
support. Reading forums isn't required for developers. The information |
| 30 |
flow thingie works in both directions though. Personally i'm not |
| 31 |
really comfortable with getting to know things the same moment a user |
| 32 |
gets to know them, because some things are discussed on -core, |
| 33 |
etc. Some devs may not even know us forums guys as well as we don't |
| 34 |
know all developers - which greatly reduces the information flow as |
| 35 |
well. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> Maybe I'm getting old or summat, but isn't this more of a "Here's how we |
| 38 |
> want to recruit for the forums mods" proposal rather than a "Gentoo |
| 39 |
> Linux Enhancement Proposal"? |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
> Cool - here's the feedback in a nutshell. |
| 42 |
> Thumbs up aside from once thing - why the need for a GLEP? |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
First we thought about sending a mail to gentoo-dev with "Hi, we wanna |
| 45 |
be official gentoo staff as well, kthxbyebye", but that might not have |
| 46 |
been very productive. A glep was chosen because it seems to be the |
| 47 |
best way to change something in the organisation of Gentoo: |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
"We intend GLEPs to be the primary mechanisms for proposing |
| 50 |
significant new features, for collecting community input on an issue, |
| 51 |
and for documenting the design decisions that have gone into Gentoo |
| 52 |
Linux. The GLEP author is responsible for building consensus within |
| 53 |
the community and documenting dissenting opinions." [2] |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
[2] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0001.html#what-is-a-glep |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
cheers, |
| 58 |
Wernfried (amne) |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
-- |
| 61 |
Fppmpppffpppmpfpffmffmppmpm Mfpmmmmmmfmm |
| 62 |
fpp.mfpmmmmmmfmm@×××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××.mmmfmp |
| 63 |
mfpfmpfmppfm://fpfppffpmmpppff.ppmfmfmpm.mmmfmp/~mmmppmpppmpppppmffppfppp/ |
| 64 |
http://www.namesuppressed.com/kenny/ |
| 65 |
-- |
| 66 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives