Re: On improving mailing list [was: How to Boot Linux ISO Images Directly From Your Hard Drive Debian]
Hello,
On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 04:06:43PM -0700, Weaver wrote:
> On 10-08-2021 07:54, Andy Smith wrote:
> > I really don't want to get into calling out specific sub-threads
> > that have been ridiculously off-topic recently, They are not hard to
> > find; there's just so many of them.
>
> That wasn't the point. I pointed out an over dramatisation of the
> situation is not conducive to the sort of accurate pre-analytical stage
> required in order to specify a problem in order to deal with it
> accurately.
> Your answer to that is to specify `ridiculously off-topic threads'.
I'm saying that the number of off-topics posts here is often well in
excess of the number of on-topic ones, and that I think it isn't
conducive to user support.
And by "off-topic" I'm not talking about just replying in a
conversational tone, or asking for clarifications, or suggesting
other solutions or anything like that. I mean posts that become
totally unrelated to Debian and its use.
For the purposes of this conversation I do think these are easy to
spot. I do understand that you feel these aren't an issue. I'm just
saying why I don't think there's a need to specifically call these
out right now.
> Is there to be a rigorous deletion of anything not Debian related
> within each email?
I think it would be best if such things were not posted here, yes,
not while this is the support venue.
> Is there to be no polite, courteous format, simply because it's not
> `Debian-related'?
I would really have hoped that it would be obvious that I'm not
asking for people to be impolite or discourteous; that I'm not
talking about normal conversational responses to support queries
being banned.
I'm talking about things that have drifted completely away from
being about Debian.
> Things can get just a little too rigid, on the way to creating a total
> lack of community that nobody wants to be a part of.
>
> > I understand that there's plenty of people who think the current
> > situation is not a problem, but I think there's also people who do
> > think there is some issue here. I'm one of them and I'm giving my
> > opinion in a thread where it was specifically asked for.
>
> And who isn't?
Well, this bit was in response to you saying, "if there's a problem
that requires resolution…" so was just me reiterating that I do
think there is, but that I do understand that plenty of people don't
think there is. i.e. this has not just come out of nowhere.
> > Absolutely, but it's discouraged by the format and what gets through
> > tends to be moderated away so it's less prominent. This results in a
> > better experience both for the question asker and later researchers
> > who come across it.
>
> No, the rudeness is jumped on by members of the community more than
> `moderators'.
> The format changes nothing.
I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean. When I said
"moderated" here, I meant by the people doing the moderation,
which on a Stack site is mostly the community.
I do find that quite effective in making poor answers and disruptive
comments less visible on such sites, so I can't agree that the
format changes nothing.
> You might see one interjection as rude and unnecessary, while I might
> see it as a required ingredient in placing a clown in their place.
The idea that it would be necessary to put a clown in their place
publicly and with the same visibility as other posts in the thread
is something that feels to me most toxic in a support environment.
We've all been there - someone posts a silly, inadvisable,
ill-thought out or downright incorrect response to a support
question. One feels compelled to post a correction. Hopefully one
manages to do so without being overly offensive or cruel, but
putting a clown in their place can go that way sometimes. It's good
that the correction was delivered, less so if it ended up being
delivered in an offensive way, but even after that, the correction
just has the weight of one email in a thread.
Often times, the worst clowns are convinced they aren't clowns at
all. They will double down on their wrongness, and they can post
just as often as you can.
A lot of the time it needs experienced users to spot what is a
good answer (or good advice) and what is bad. It doesn't work so
well to go by who delivers the most devastating come-back or who
hammers their point home most forcefully or most often.
The Stack sites I frequent do seem to benefit from poor quality
answers and comments being moderated away. People can still engage
in back and forth conflict but what most people consider to be the
best answers float to the top. There isn't much need to place clowns
in their place for all to see and I think the support experience is
better for it.
> > There are good reasons why most times when I have a problem, a
> > search engine expedition will usually lead me to answers on Stack
> > Overflow-like sites before the archives of discussion lists.
>
> Quite often that's the case, and so it should be.
If you agree with this point, what is your opposition to such a
thing being the primary user support venue of Debian? As in direct
support queries to such a thing and leave debian-user basically as
it is?
> > New users can't do this. Of course they can be taught but that is a
> > huge impediment to getting their problems solved.
>
> If they can't handle the most basic use of a mail agent, they can't do
> anything.
This feels really elitist and can be used to counter any attempt to
make things easier or better for unskilled users.
You know, just because we paid our dues over the years having a hard
time gathering knowledge, it doesn't mean that everyone else should
too, almost as if it's some sort of trial to check they are worthy.
I feel that's generally true but even moreso when you consider that
by making it hard for people who aren't like you, you tend to only
recruit people who are like you.
If it's desirable to have some sort of exclusive club of users who
put enough effort in to have earned the right to ask questions and
participate in debate then fair enough, no reason why that can't
exist. But should it be where the Debian project directs its users
first and foremost?
In terms of numbers of questions asked and answers accepted per
day, Ask Ubuntu does some really good numbers you know.
> > People coming by later to find answers also still have to sift
> > through it all.
>
> `have to sift through it all' and `They are not hard to
> find; there's just so many of them' - do make up your mind.
Come on now. Imagine coming across an unfamiliar list's archive,
seeing a subject line that might be related to a problem you're
having, and then tens or hundreds of responses that seem to diverge
away from that topic but you can never be quite sure whether they
will return or not.
That's a very different scenario from me saying, "just look back
through the list recently and you'll find many examples of
completely off-topic postings".
> they generally have the addition of something ;like `Off-Topic' in
> the header.
> So, if they're easy to recognise, where's the problem?
I don't believe that new users do find them easy to recognise, nor
that casual archive browsers appreciate the diversions from topic.
I don't believe that new users do appreciate having some irrelevant
part of their post picked up on and turned into sprawling
sub-thread that isn't even about Debian let alone their question.
I don't believe that most users benefit when such threads go way out
of control and result in code of conduct violations that are never
addressed.
I think there is a relatively small group, out of the thousands
subscribed here, that enjoy those diversions and perpetuating them,
and that it really only serves them.
So that's where I think the problems are and why I think it would be
good to try separating the user support from the debate club.
Cheers,
Andy
--
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
Reply to: