Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform
Henning Makholm <email@example.com> wrote:
> Scripsit MJ Ray <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > * Neither feels that the groups it reports on are their main
> > audience.
> As far as I can see, the main audience of DWN is Debian developers,
> package maintainers, and other members of the community. This audience
> is exactly whom they report on.
That's what I thought, too. Yet, when I mentioned that DWN
wasn't working well for in-project communication, Martin
Schulze told me that was never a goal of DWN. This is partly
why I think the DPLs have to address internal communication,
as it's mostly ad-hoc and no-one notices until it fails hard.
> > * They have friends who get puffed regularly, but "good news"
> > stories about groups on the blacklist can get ignored and/or
> > stuffed at the bottom of the issue.
> Huh? Which "groups" do you perceive as being blacklisted by DWN? Could
> it be that there are simply no readers of the relevant mailing lists
> who regularly report news to the DWN editors?
Yes, the lack of reporters is the direct problem, but I suggest
that it is caused by the editorial bias against certain groups.
I'll let others enumerate groups they think don't get fair runs,
as I'm not going to continue the DWN debate now. It was a side
point, that debian-women were spending time imitating something
which is not good internal communication.
> > * The editors take the traditional approach of completely ignoring
> > most criticism and either accusing the complainer or trying to
> > game them in the broken system.
> Huh? This accusation demands to be substantiated by references to
> mailing list posts where Joey or any other DWN editor accuses someone
> who complains about their editorial policy of "trying to game them in
> the broken system".
I may do that later, so for future: Does email@example.com have an archive?
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Subscribed to this list. No need to Cc, thanks.