Discussion:
[bitcoin-dev] 1 Year bitcoin-dev Moderation Review
Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
2016-10-09 10:26:07 UTC
Permalink
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 <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
<https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
Ryan Grant via bitcoin-dev
2016-10-09 20:31:54 UTC
Permalink
Maybe bitcoin-discuss should have been opt-out rather than opt-in.

Dear moderators, what is the subscription count to bitcoin-discuss,
and bitcoin-dev?
Henning Kopp via bitcoin-dev
2016-10-10 07:38:06 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,

I totally agree with the assessment of the situation. Previously I
learned a lot about bitcoin on this list. There were a lot of great
ideas regarding the protocol and the surrounding ecosystem. Now there
is mainly talk about code and BIPs, which is the main purpose of a
developer list.
I do not feel that we should clog bitcoin-dev again with
non-development talk but rather find a way to get bitcoin-discuss
going. My impression is that bitcoin-discuss has not reached a
critical mass of contributors. The question is how we can change that.

All the best
Henning
Post by Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
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 <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
<https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--
Henning Kopp
Institute of Distributed Systems
Ulm University, Germany

Office: O27 - 3402
Phone: +49 731 50-24138
Web: http://www.uni-ulm.de/in/vs/~kopp
Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev
2016-10-10 15:34:17 UTC
Permalink
I sent my previous email ONLY to bitcoin-***@lists.linuxfoundation.org
and it waited in the moderation queue. I don't know when moderation was
added to this list, but it seems to me that it's a misstep.

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:38 AM, Henning Kopp via bitcoin-dev <
Post by Henning Kopp via bitcoin-dev
Hi all,
I totally agree with the assessment of the situation. Previously I
learned a lot about bitcoin on this list. There were a lot of great
ideas regarding the protocol and the surrounding ecosystem. Now there
is mainly talk about code and BIPs, which is the main purpose of a
developer list.
I do not feel that we should clog bitcoin-dev again with
non-development talk but rather find a way to get bitcoin-discuss
going. My impression is that bitcoin-discuss has not reached a
critical mass of contributors. The question is how we can change that.
All the best
Henning
Post by Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
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
Post by Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
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
Post by Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
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
Post by Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
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,
Post by Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
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
Post by Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
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
Post by Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
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
Post by Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
process, the value of the list was damaged, but not irreparably so.
Best,
Jeremy
* From the email introducing the bitcoin-dev moderation policy,
"Generally
Post by Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
discouraged: shower thoughts, wild speculation, jokes, +1s, non-technical
bitcoin issues, rehashing settled topics without new data, moderation
concerns."
--
@JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
<https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--
Henning Kopp
Institute of Distributed Systems
Ulm University, Germany
Office: O27 - 3402
Phone: +49 731 50-24138
Web: http://www.uni-ulm.de/in/vs/~kopp
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--
I like to provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do you need a
techie?
I own Litmocracy <http://www.litmocracy.com> and Meme Racing
<http://www.memeracing.net> (in alpha).
I'm the webmaster for The Voluntaryist <http://www.voluntaryist.com> which
now accepts Bitcoin.
I also code for The Dollar Vigilante <http://dollarvigilante.com/>.
"He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules" - Satoshi
Nakamoto
Loading...