[swift-evolution] [Discussion] mailing list alternative

[Ted kremenek]

> On Feb 2, 2017, at 6:36 PM, Karl Wagner <razielim at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 3 Feb 2017, at 02:55, Ted kremenek <kremenek at apple.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 2, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Karl Wagner via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Personally I think that's an absurd reason not to move to a forum. What is your complaint? That it's _too_ inclusive? That others only have trivial things to say? Frankly, every way I try to interpret your comment makes it come off as snobbery.
>> 
>> Hi Karl,
>> 
>> I appreciate your candor here, but let's avoid making these comments sound personal.  This is a thread prompting polarized opinions, and most of it has been civil and productive.  Let's keep it that way.  I do respect that you are anxious to see progress on the resolution of the topic, but these same points could be made in a less antagonistic way.
>> 
>> I encourage all of you to re-read this part of the Code of Conduction on Swift.org:
>> 
>>> Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include:
>>> 
>>> The use of sexualized language or imagery
>>> Personal attacks
>>> Trolling or insulting/derogatory comments
>>> Public or private harassment
>>> Publishing other’s private information, such as physical or electronic addresses, without explicit permission
>>> Other unethical or unprofessional conduct
>>> Project maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct, or to ban temporarily or permanently any contributor for other behaviors that they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful.
>>> 
>> Thank you,
>> Ted
>> 
> 
> As I explained to Erica, it isn’t meant to be read personally. What I said is that the community should be as inclusive as possible and that prejudicing certain opinions as “trivial” conceptually runs against that.

I appreciate that perspective — and I personally agree with that point.  My cautionary statement — which was also directed at others on the thread — was to ensure that the thread remains amicable, and that our choice of our words match our intentions as the arguments become potentially polarized.

> 
> That’s also my reply to the opinion others have shared that subscribing and publishing your email address is a kind of “good pain” to filter out the weak. Take the String model for example - isn’t it possible that this one particular discussion is critical to my business, and that I don’t really care about “for-else syntax” or “Annotation of Warnings/Errors” or “Compound Names for Enum Cases”? I don’t see the logic which says that if I care very much about one aspect of the language, I must care equally about everything else that ever changes with it.

I agree with this point, and I'll be honest that I am not concerned about the forums being flooded with noise just because we removed friction for more people to participate.  The swift-evolution participants have established a timbre for its discussions already that I don't see fundamentally changing if we move to a forum.

> 
> I don’t understand why some feel it is so important to discourage ad-hoc contributions. Open-source lives off ad-hoc.

For me, removing some of the friction for participation is one of the most appealing aspects of a forum.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20170202/9432dd50/attachment.html>