[clug] New list?

[Daniel Pittman]

Eyal Lebedinsky <eyal at eyal.emu.id.au> writes:

> I don't see your point. If we keep to the spirit of the original subject
> (technical or not) then people can easily decide what thread to follow.

I think this would hit problems when folks disagreed, honestly, about what the
was in keeping with the spirit of the subject and what wasn't.

You and I have already significantly disagreed, in the past, on what
constitutes a reasonable part of a thread and not — and I believe that
disagreement was in good faith, not bad, on both parts.

> e.g. If the subject is "how do I get this TV tuner driver to work" and
> you want to discuss a license issue then it probably does not belong
> in the same thread. But it is OK on this list.

What happens if, say, the license of that driver is unclear, and someone feels
that it is important that is discussed?  It isn't like this is uncommon,
either: the NVIDIA binary blob is pretty widely used...

> And if I mention that a friend of mine "he has it running OK" and you
> want to say that there are also women using Linux then it again should
> go in another thread. But it is OK on this list.

...and I am sure that you see the lines as being pretty clear about what is
and isn't "in the spirit of the thread"; so, by and large, do I.  The problem
is that we disagree on those decisions.

The obvious example, to which you refer, is previous discussion that included
privilege and gender bias in the FOSS community, and CLUG specifically.


This also ignores the harder part of my question: how do you propose that this
is enforced?  How would offenders be penalized, and who would make the
judgement call on that?

        Daniel


> On 19/08/10 20:26, Daniel Pittman wrote:
>> Eyal Lebedinsky<eyal at eyal.emu.id.au>  writes:
>>
>> I don't know how well that would work: where is the line between technical and
>> non-technical discussion?
>>
>> On which side does, say, GPL licensing for a project fit?  Not a technical
>> issue, but a legal one, or possibly an ethical one, depending.
>>
>> However, something that might come up in an otherwise technical discussion?
>> Absolutely.
>>
>>
>> Likewise, software freedom day: clearly a non-technical subject; what happens
>> when someone wants to talk about what software to distribute?  Is that tech or
>> non-tech?  When does it cross the line?
>>
>>
>> I think, at best, you are inviting arguments over personal judgement with this
>> distinction: what you see as "non-technical" I might see as "technical", or
>> the other way around.
>>
>>
>> Finally, what penalty are you proposing when people violate this rule, and how
>> are you proposing it be enforced?
>>
>>          Daniel
>>
>>> How about this: A technical thread (judging by the subject) should stay
>>> technical.  People should refrain from non-technical responses. People *can*
>>> start another thread to deal with their pet non-technical subject, even in
>>> response to the *other* (technical) thread. All is welcome.
>>>
>>> If we all keep this civility the we can all share the one list. I personally
>>> would rather we did *not* split the list, and I an ready to read or ignore
>>> threads as I wish.
>>>
>>> cheers
>>>
>>> On 19/08/10 13:54, Chris Smart wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 9:45 AM, David Lloyd<lloy0076 at adam.com.au>   wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll ignore the "with all due respect" - you may well be the person in the world who says that without meaning "you're an idiot" ;-P
>>>>
>>>> Actually, I really did mean that because I respect that the list
>>>> currently does permit social talk (the only thing it does not permit
>>>> is adverts by non-list members). Like I said, I'm not trying to stop
>>>> people from saying what they want to, I just want a place where I can
>>>> discuss Linux issues with technical people without the noise. I
>>>> understand that the CLUG list is not the medium to do that, so case
>>>> closed.
>>>>
>>>>> +1 - putting it in my inevitable blunt style (and noone will probably like me for it), LinuxSA started to decline when the lists split.
>>>>
>>>> I get the message, loud and clear. Over and out.
>>>>
>>>> -c
>>>
>>> --
>>> Eyal Lebedinsky	(eyal at eyal.emu.id.au)
>>
>
> -- 
> Eyal Lebedinsky	(eyal at eyal.emu.id.au)

-- 
✣ Daniel Pittman            ✉ daniel at rimspace.net            ☎ +61 401 155 707
               ♽ made with 100 percent post-consumer electrons