User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

25 Women in 10 Free Software Organizations for GNOME's Outreach Program for Women

25 Women in 10 Free Software Organizations for GNOME's Outreach Program for Women

Posted Feb 2, 2013 12:16 UTC (Sat) by xan (guest, #58606)
In reply to: 25 Women in 10 Free Software Organizations for GNOME's Outreach Program for Women by AlexHudson
Parent article: 25 Women in 10 Free Software Organizations for GNOME's Outreach Program for Women

> I don't restrict this belief to posters who are against pro-women programmes. I genuinely believe that comments whose content is largely destructive ("I want you to stop doing X because I don't like it", whether X is "developing systemd", "GNOME UI improvements", "development under a BSD license", whatever) shouldn't have a place here.

Hear, hear.

It's getting to a point where I basically skim through the first comments and when I see the usual mix of violent and destructive garbage I just ignore everything else (possible missing the hidden gem among the trash). I think the only way to fix this is to implement serious editorial control in the comments to make this place a high quality technical debate forum that is welcoming for everyone. As thing stands now it's only welcoming to angry privileged geek males that seem to hate most things.


(Log in to post comments)

25 Women in 10 Free Software Organizations for GNOME's Outreach Program for Women

Posted Feb 2, 2013 19:09 UTC (Sat) by duffy (guest, #31787) [Link]

"It's getting to a point where I basically skim through the first comments and when I see the usual mix of violent and destructive garbage I just ignore everything else"

Exactly. To me this is really sad, because LWN didn't used to be that type of place.

25 Women in 10 Free Software Organizations for GNOME's Outreach Program for Women

Posted Feb 2, 2013 21:22 UTC (Sat) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]

let me humbly suggest that this algorithm for comment skimming is going to tend to be a downward spiral for you. The most thoughtful comments, seldom come first.

I would posit that generally speaking the first people to post on a comment thread on a political/policy subject are the people who are less likely to be thinking rationally, or with an open mind. They more likely or not either reacting primarily emotionally, or have a lovingly crafted (and generally well-used) ax they are looking to grind into razor edge perfection. Or they are just bored.

And I include my own behavior in that observation, I'm no saint.

Sometimes its really unfortunate that the first people to post, are the people who set the tone and agenda for discussion for days afterwards.

And with the above said in mind, I would make a different proposal with regard to editoral control.

Implement a peer subscriber ranking system attach a post visibility delay to the ranking. People ranked highly by their peers have their posts delayed for shorter periods of time than those rankly low. This takes the negative impact out of destructive first posters. The posts still show up, but only after highly ranked posters get to set the tone and direction of the visual discussion. The less appreciated posters, as their posts show up after the extended delay, just end up looking like sidebar spurs to what is hopefully a more nuanced discussion for the main threads.

-jef

25 Women in 10 Free Software Organizations for GNOME's Outreach Program for Women

Posted Feb 2, 2013 23:29 UTC (Sat) by sorpigal (subscriber, #36106) [Link]

> Implement a peer subscriber ranking system attach a post visibility delay to the ranking.
This seems to implicitly presupposes a peergroup that is of a single mind on average. For divisive issues where there are >=2 passionate, reasonable sides it might not work very well. I guess it would probably fail open, where most posts show up quickly, so it's worth a try.

25 Women in 10 Free Software Organizations for GNOME's Outreach Program for Women

Posted Feb 2, 2013 23:58 UTC (Sat) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]

No, such a system would never stop discussion when there are substantial disagreements. But it would give all of us a chance to have the discussion be led by those among us who we recognize as thoughtful and well-spoken. It would delay some of the the anticipated noise, even my noise. If there is going to be a debate on a thorny issue, I'd rather see the discussion led by people we've come to expect to be able to talk through conflict, instead of just random people who push the submit button first.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds