Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Splitting developer-oriented and expert user mailing lists

[R0b0t1]

On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
> W dniu sob, 02.12.2017 o godzinie 19∶33 -0600, użytkownik R0b0t1
> napisał:
>> Hello,
>>
>> In every mailing list conversation, there are at least three people:
>> the two conversing, and the future reader. I point this out as I think
>> it important that everyone realize that not all posts are written for
>> those immediately participating in the conversation.
>>
>> Some time ago I was offered some equipment due to my history of
>> open-source contributions to a variety of projects. I asked the donor
>> to forward it (or money) to the Gentoo foundation, but they declined,
>> citing a general distaste for the management of software projects in
>> general and specific issues they believed existed within Gentoo.
>
> I'm not sure if this is relevant to the topic at hand. There are many
> issues within Gentoo. I'm trying to address one of them.
>

The point is that actions of [some of] the developers are affecting
the public perception of Gentoo to the point at least one person
hasn't wanted to donate.

>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
>> > Hello, everyone.
>> >
>> > This is something that's been talked about privately a lot lately but it
>> > seems that nobody went forward to put things into motion. SO here's
>> > a proposal that aims to improve the condition of our mailing lists
>> > and solve some of the problems they are facing today.
>> >
>>
>> If you have in fact discussed this off list with people who agree, I
>> think it is important that you invite them to comment. Not only will
>> it show support for what you have detailed, it will allow them to
>> explain the problems they have in greater detail, so that perhaps a
>> solution that does not involve restricting list access could be found.
>
> This sentence merely focuses on 'don't shoot the messenger' part which
> will happen anyway. Those people won't come here to '+1' the proposal
> because this mailing list is not supposed to be about mail popularity
> contests.
>

No, but policy changes are. They should be critically analyzed. I'm
not going to pretend like I can vote, but I can try to make you feel
bad about not answering my questions.

> Also because they don't want to be targeted by people misbehaving here.
> In fact, a number of them already pinged me today privately showing
> support, and some of them told me exactly that -- that they don't want
> to become a target of aggression. A few participants of this mailing
> list have shown harassment towards people that stood up to them --
> including constant insults on various public and private channels.
>

Again, no one has any right to not be offended. For something of this
nature I feel public support should be necessary.

>>
>> It may be that I am misunderstanding your language, but what you have
>> presented does not leave many things open for discussion. It seems
>> like what you have presented is to be either accepted or rejected as
>> is. Seeing as my opinion does not matter, it further seems like it
>> will simply be accepted as is.
>
> I simply don't believe that after so many iterations there's any more
> option that hasn't been tried or rejected already.
>

As noted, there is one: analyzing the actions of those who are being
"attacked" to see why people are bothering to do it in the first
place. I sincerely doubt the offensive parties are doing what they are
doing without cause.

But no, the Gentoo developers are always above reproach.

>> >
>> > Problems
>> > ========
>> >
>> > Currently the developer-oriented mailing lists gentoo-dev and gentoo-
>> > project are open to posting by everyone. While this has been generally
>> > beneficial, we seem to be having major problems with some
>> > of the posters for more than a year. Off hand, I can think of three:
>> >
>> > 1. Repeating attacks against Gentoo and/or Gentoo developers (including
>> > pure personal attacks). While it is understandable that some people may
>> > be frustrated and need to vent off, repeating attacks from the same
>> > person are seriously demotivating to everyone.
>> >
>>
>> No one has any right to not be offended. If Gentoo developers are
>> receiving criticism for their behavior, then perhaps it would be best
>> that they critically analyze their actions and the effect that they
>> have on other people.
>>
>> As far as I am aware most developers never get harassed and go quietly
>> on about their business. I have even asked some questions similar to
>> the questions I have asked on this list that people have felt were
>> adversarial. However, these developers didn't seem to mind my
>> questions and spent 5 minutes or so of their time on a response.
>>
>> > 2. Frequent off-topics, often irrelevant to the thread at hand.
>> > I understand that some of those topics are really interesting but it is
>> > really time-consuming to filter through all the off-topic mails
>> > in search of data relevant to the topic at hand. What's worst, sometimes
>> > you don't even get a single on-topic reply.
>> >
>>
>> Does the list have a digest subscription option? I find that extremely
>> helpful for one list I am subscribed to (Perl6 development) which is
>> very high volume. On the other hand, lots of offtopic chatter would
>> still be hard to sort through, but I think it needs to be considered
>> whether the chatter the list currently receives is truly off topic.
>> What if it is simply concerns or subjects that the OP did not want to
>> consider? Does that make it off topic? Is the problem more involved
>> than previously thought?
>>
>> > 3. Support requests. Some of our 'expert users' have been abusing
>> > the mailing lists to request support (because it's easier to ask
>> > everyone than go through proper channels) and/or complain about bug
>> > resolutions. This is a minor issue but still it is one.
>> >
>>
>> In the case of actual support requests, it might be worth taking some
>> kind of action against the user, but the general level of competence
>> of Gentoo users makes me wary that this may be a mischaracterization
>> of the intent of the email. If something like a "support request"
>> percolates to gentoo-dev, it may be of a similar vein as a complaint
>> about a bug resolution. Complaining about bug resolutions seems valid,
>> especially if questions on the tracker have been ignored.
>>
>> Some developers in particular seem to not appreciate being held
>> accountable for their actions. In most notable cases, all anyone ever
>> does is ask for an explanation as to why something occurred - and in
>> most notable cases, that question is ignored, with no recourse left to
>> the user or contributor.
>>
>> Personally, I tried to ask why eix's "optimizations" flag was removed,
>> when other packages *do the exact same thing.* Still no response. How
>> am I supposed to interpret this?
>
> I'm sorry but the purpose of this thread is not to convince you that
> the problems exist. If you haven't experienced them already, then it
> would be polite of you to either accept them as a fact, or do some
> research yourself.
>

Your job is not to convince me, personally, but the future reader of
this list. If you have given up on doing so then you have admitted
that you do not want to be held accountable for your actions because
you do not feel you need to explain why you are doing what you are
doing.

> I understand that you might want to know things. However, it is
> generally impolite if someone 'comes late to the party' and starts
> shouting questions that the existing participants know answers to
> already. This is distorting to the conversation at hand.
>

I am not shouting. I am politely, but pointedly, asking questions that
you ostensibly should already have the answer to. If you do not have
the answer, then I feel it is clear to future readers of the list that
you are making decisions for nonsensical reasons.

> In such a situation, as I said it is usually polite to try to find
> the answers yourself or politely and privately query one
> of the participants who you are acquainted to or is otherwise able
> and willing to help you.
>

I have. I can't trawl years of mailing list archives to find the
problematic posts, nor do I think I would want to read those posts
anyway. I am also incapable of understanding in a short time a
years-long problem.

I tried to figure out why wltjr was pushed out of the Gentoo and
couldn't do it. What I can find makes it seem like someone was overly
sensitive and was able to get ComRel to overreact. Granted, wltjr is
at times not well spoken, but I really have a hard time understanding
how anyone thought he had anything but good intentions.

From my point of view it makes everyone involved look ridiculous,
wltjr less so. Consequently I am not very inclined to believe you and
the unnamed parties when they say they have a valid complaint. My
experience is full of people being offended at things like (what most
people would consider) polite disagreement.

Then again, you can do what you want and ignore me - I can't do
anything about it.

>>
>> >
>> > All of those issues are slowly rendering the mailing lists impossible to
>> > use. People waste a lot of time trying to gather feedback, and get
>> > demotivated in the process. A steadily growing number of developers
>> > either stop reading the mailing lists altogether, or reduce their
>> > activity.
>> >
>> > For example, eclass reviews usually don't get more than one reply,
>> > and even that is not always on-topic. And after all, getting this kind
>> > of feedback is one of the purposes of the -dev mailing list!
>> >
>>
>> It may be that this is separate from the content of the mailing list.
>> Do some of the developers simply not like the format of a mailing
>> list? A lot of projects are now using Slack and Discourse in addition
>> to IRC. I personally do not like either of those services, but some
>> people think they allow reduce response times, aid in comprehension,
>> allowing greater involvement of developers.
>>
>> As it is, it seems to me like a lot of development happens on IRC and off list.
>
> Yes. Sometimes only because IRC is much faster. Sometimes because using
> mailing lists becomes impossible due to problems listed above.
>
>> >
>> > Proposal
>> > ========
>> >
>> > Give the failure of other solutions tried for this, I'd like to
>> > establish the following changes to the mailing lists:
>> >
>> > 1. Posting to gentoo-dev@ and gentoo-project@ mailing lists will be
>> > initially restricted to active Gentoo developers.
>> >
>> > 1a. Subscription (reading) and archives will still be open.
>> >
>> > 1b. Active Gentoo contributors will be able to obtain posting access
>> > upon being vouched for by an active Gentoo developer.
>> >
>> > 2. A new mailing list 'gentoo-expert' will be formed to provide
>> > a discussion medium for expert Gentoo users and developers.
>> >
>> > 2a. gentoo-expert will have open posting access like gentoo-dev has now.
>> >
>> >
>> > Rationale
>> > =========
>> >
>> > I expect that some of you will find this a drastic measure. However, I
>> > would like to point out that I believe we've already exhausted all other
>> > options to no avail.
>> >
>>
>> There is an option that has not been discussed, and that is
>> questioning why the gentoo-dev list receives offtopic replies,
>> personal attacks, and trolling.
>
> People's private issues are not topic of this mailing list. It is
> generally impolite and unprofessional to discuss them publicly. Please
> don't do that.
>

If the messages are being posted to gentoo-dev then I don't see why
you consider the issue private. At least one party intends it to be
public, probably because it's not a personal attack and is related to
Gentoo.

Sadly, since you do not feel it necessary for those slighted to list
their complaints in some form or another, nobody but them and yourself
will know a problem ever existed.

>> > The problems of more abusive behavior from some of the mailing list
>> > members have been reported to ComRel numerous times. After the failure
>> > of initial enforcement, I'm not aware of ComRel doing anything to solve
>> > the problem. The main arguments I've heard from ComRel members were:
>> >
>> > A. Bans can be trivially evaded, and history proves that those evasions
>> > create more noise than leaving the issue as is.
>> >
>> > B. People should be allowed to express their opinion [even if it's pure
>> > hate speech that carries no value to anyone].
>> >
>> > C. The replies of Gentoo developers were worse [no surprise that people
>> > lose their patience after being attacked for a few months].
>> >
>>
>> People only ever do things that make sense. Again, I invite the people
>> who are being attacked to consider why someone cares enough to bother
>> to do that. Bored teenagers go to #archlinux to have pissing contests,
>> not #gentoo.
>>
>> >
>> > The alternative suggested by ComRel pretty much boiled down to 'ignore
>> > the trolls'. While we can see this is actually starting to happen right
>> > now (even the most determined developers stopped replying), this doesn't
>> > really solve the problem because:
>> >
>>
>> To me this sounds like ComRel realized it is too easy to turn good
>> intentions into fascism.
>>
>> > I. Some people are really determined and continue sending mails even if
>> > nobody replies to them. In fact, they are perfectly capable of replying
>> > to themselves.
>> >
>> > II. This practically assumes that every new mailing list subscriber will
>> > be able to recognize the problem. Otherwise, new people will repeatedly
>> > be lured into discussing with them.
>> >
>> > III. In the end, it puts Gentoo in a bad position. Firstly, because it
>> > silently consents to misbehavior on the mailing lists. Secondly, because
>> > the lack of any statement in reply to accusations could be seen
>> > as a sign of shameful silent admittance.
>> >
>>
>> It is also entirely possible that a new user will see the troll, agree
>> with the troll, and not want to contribute to Gentoo because they
>> think the troll is right.
>>
>> >
>> > Yet another alternative that was proposed was to establish moderation of
>> > the mailing lists. However, Infrastructure has replied already that we
>> > can't deploy effective moderation with the current mailing list software
>> > and I'm not aware of anyone willing to undergo all the necessary work to
>> > change that.
>> >
>> > Even if we were able to overcome that and be able to find a good
>> > moderation team that can effectively and fairly moderate e-mails without
>> > causing huge delays, moderation has a number of own problems:
>> >
>> > α) the delays will make discussions more cumbersome, and render posting
>> > confusing to users,
>> >
>> > β) they will implicitly cause some overlap of replies (e.g. when N
>> > different people answer the same question because they don't see earlier
>> > replies until they're past moderation),
>> >
>> > γ) the problem will be solved only partially -- what if a reply contains
>> > both valuable info and personal attack?
>> >
>>
>> I agree with this logic, but please be careful - it states a problem,
>> presupposes a single solution, and then concludes that there is only
>> one course of action based on the critique applied to that one
>> solution. This is partly why I see the proposal as something which
>> does not seem to be accommodating to alternate viewpoints. It makes
>> addressing this section with an alternate viewpoint difficult, and if
>> I ignore it then it looks like I ignored part of your argument.
>>
>> >
>> > Seeing that no other effort so far has succeeded in solving the problem,
>> > splitting the mailing lists seems the best solution so far. Most
>> > notably:
>> >
>> > а. Developer mailing lists are restored to their original purpose.
>> >
>> > б. It is 'fair'. Unlike with disciplinary actions, there is no judgment
>> > problem, just a clear split between 'developers' and 'non-developers'.
>> >
>> > в. 'Expert users' are still provided with a mailing list where they can
>> > discuss Gentoo without being pushed down into 'user support' channels.
>> >
>> > г. Active contributors (in particular recruits) can still obtain posting
>> > access to the mailing lists, much like they do obtain it to #gentoo-dev
>> > right now. However, if they start misbehaving we can just remove that
>> > without the risk of evasion.
>> >
>>
>> I feel this is still a fairly large barrier to involvement. Getting
>> people to the point they want to contribute or have the knowledge to
>> contribute is the hard part, and what this will make harder to do.
>
> A mailing list is not strictly essential to contributing to Gentoo.
> I can't think of it being to much use of any recently recruited
> developers.
>

No, but the majority of developers seem standoffish, particularly the
ones that are most closely associated with the project. Perhaps there
are a lot of idiots. I don't know. But I doubt your proposal will make
it any easier for people to begin contributing.

Respectfully,
     R0b0t1