Mailing List Decorum
Rich Hickey
These mailing lists are run by, and for, people who make things. Most messages should have one of these forms:
I made something - here is my contribution
I am trying to use the thing someone made and am having trouble, please help.
I can help you with that thing someone made.
I am trying to make something and am having trouble, please help.
I can help you make something.
They are not the place for opinion pieces and diatribes.
They are not the place for advocacy about what 'ought' to be made. If you think something ought to be made, then make it. Otherwise, respect others peoples' right to choose what they do with their time.
Occasionally, there may be disagreements about how something has been, or will be, made. These disagreements should take the form of technical arguments. To make a technical argument that gets (and gives!) respect:
Keep it short
Stick to the facts
Use logic
Leave people out of it
Avoid rhetorical devices:
Superfluous or opinion-laden adjectives
Claims to speak for the community, or that everyone agrees with you.
Threats of what will happen unless things go your way
Any flavor of 'the sky is falling'
If you are not the one making something, you should restrict your input to very short technical arguments supporting your position. If someone has already made your point, just +1 it.
Please keep your posts short.
Ignoring these guidelines fails to respect the time and effort of people who make things, which you should care about if you intend to be one.
Thanks,
Rich
Sam Aaron
Do these guidelines, therefore, attempt preclude threads such as the discussion on the possible impact of new technologies (i.e. Dart), constructive discussions on development practices (i.e. REPL-driven-dev vs TDD), links to newly discovered external resources (i.e. new presentations/slidedecks) and general positive opinion "Wow, that was cool! Thanks so much for making that :-)"
Perhaps much of this discussion would be better moved to the comments of external blogs? Still, it feels to me that the ability to constructively express and communicate *positive* opinion is a powerful source of energy which can cultivate enthusiasm and a general positive attitude within any community. I feel that because we're a technical community means we should be spending more care and effort fostering these social elements rather than trying to suppress/eradicate them.
Sam
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Clojure" group.
> To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.com
> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> clojure+u...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
Devin Walters
I think the big point being made (and one I agree with) is that we should try, to the best of our ability, to keep our focus on the constructive. Diatribes and/or opinion pieces are less constructive, in general.
I will also point out Rich wrote: "*Most* messages should have one of these forms:" and "This is just a reminder." I don't see this as any sort of implicit threat to ban opposing sides.
My reading: Let's keep things constructive, productive, thoughtful, and objective. Let's try to avoid discussions about what ought to happen and focus more on doing it.
--
Devin
> > To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.com (mailto:clo...@googlegroups.com)
> > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > clojure+u...@googlegroups.com (mailto:clojure+u...@googlegroups.com)
> > For more options, visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Clojure" group.
> To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.com (mailto:clo...@googlegroups.com)
> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> clojure+u...@googlegroups.com (mailto:clojure+u...@googlegroups.com)
Sam Aaron
I totally agree with you :-) I read the core of the post in a similar fashion and I respect and agree with the general notion. However, my perception of the tone of the message was that it felt slightly 'anti-opinion' whereas I believe that constructive positive opinion has an extremely important part to play in nurturing a progressive community. Hopefully I just misinterpreted it.
I believe that there's a big difference between not ruling out positive opinion by scoping the guidelines to "most messages" and explicitly encouraging it.
One of the main reasons why I've been hacking mad crazy on Overtone is not for any specific technical goal or even to make something that necessarily contributes to the making of other things. I'm also not in the business of only solving "hard" problems. The main reason I've been doing what I do is purely to make people other smile and feel good because they can do things that they perhaps couldn't before - namely be and feel musical. I therefore always want to hear the Clojure community's opinion on this because it energises me to continue.
Sam
Rich Hickey
engendering non-productive discussions about censorship etc.
The main message is one of consideration. You might have positive
opinions about say, music, and I might be interested in them, but our
discussing music here wouldn't be very considerate of others. Forum-
based discussion boards might have a 'lounge' area for shooting the
breeze, making it easy for people to avoid by not entering. On a
mailing list such as this everyone gets everything, and it can't
really support that kind of discussion whilst respecting others.
As to your specific examples - the discussion about Dart was about its
impact on ClojureScript, and relevant. Had it been an opinion piece on
the merits of Dart itself, it would have been off topic. Development
practices and resources are about helping people make things, and
certainly thanking people for making things is always welcome. There
will be times, yes, when the most considerate thing will be to write
opinions in a blog post, perhaps putting only a pointer here and
following up on the blog.
Your last bit confuses me. You certainly are making something
wonderful in, and for, Clojure with Overtone. I don't know where I
said or implied anything about the discussions being only about making
tools or solving hard problems.
In any case, there is no effort to suppress or eradicate underfoot. I
am not going to enumerate what is ok and what is not, except insofar
as to say respect and consideration are ok, and a lack of them is not.
Rich
On Oct 15, 4:57 pm, Sam Aaron <samaa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Devlin,
>
> I totally agree with you :-) I read the core of the post in a similar fashion and I respect and agree with the general notion. However, my perception of the tone of the message was that it felt slightly 'anti-opinion' whereas I believe that constructive positive opinion has an extremely important part to play in nurturing a progressive community. Hopefully I just misinterpreted it.
>
> I believe that there's a big difference between not ruling out positive opinion by scoping the guidelines to "most messages" and explicitly encouraging it.
>
> One of the main reasons why I've been hacking mad crazy on Overtone is not for any specific technical goal or even to make something that necessarily contributes to the making of other things. I'm also not in the business of only solving "hard" problems. The main reason I've been doing what I do is purely to make people other smile and feel good because they can do things that they perhaps couldn't before - namely be and feel musical. I therefore always want to hear the Clojure community's opinion on this because it energises me to continue.
>
> Sam
>
Sam Aaron
On 15 Oct 2011, at 23:14, Rich Hickey wrote:
> Your last bit confuses me. You certainly are making something
> wonderful in, and for, Clojure with Overtone. I don't know where I
> said or implied anything about the discussions being only about making
> tools or solving hard problems.
My apologies - I wasn't advocating that you had said or implied that the discussions only be about making tools or solving hard problems.
Sam Aaron
On 15 Oct 2011, at 23:14, Rich Hickey wrote:
>
> Your last bit confuses me. You certainly are making something
> wonderful in, and for, Clojure with Overtone. I don't know where I
> said or implied anything about the discussions being only about making
> tools or solving hard problems.
My apologies - I wasn't advocating that you had said or implied that the discussions only be about making tools or solving hard problems. Rather that these are typical and laudable efforts by many of the Clojure community that would totally benefit from the kind of discussional focus as you indicated in your initial email. I was attempting to draw a distinction to work specifically targeting end users, such as Overtone, which totally benefits from such opinionated discussion. At least, those opinions can encourage and provide valuable feedback.
> In any case, there is no effort to suppress or eradicate underfoot. I
> am not going to enumerate what is ok and what is not, except insofar
> as to say respect and consideration are ok, and a lack of them is not.
I think this focus on respect and consideration is exactly what I had in mind - but I was clearly not able to express it such a succinct and lucid manner :-) Well put.
Sam