[PLUG-TALK] Ironic

[glen]

Fernando Freire wrote circa 11-10-10 12:12 PM:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Russell Johnson <russ at dimstar.net> 
> wrote:
>> 
>> I find it highly ironic that this list has a better signal to
>> noise ratio than plug.
> 
> IIRC Michael refused to be a part of this list because of repeated 
> attacks on his ideology. Strange then, that he continues to be 
> belligerent towards members of the legitimate list. (Vaguely 
> referencing some thread from earlier this year)

I've long vacillated over one method I've seen used in OSS communities,
humiliation.  There are several OSS gurus who actively humiliate novice
contributors.  The impact on quality can't be denied, I think.  If only
the tough and determined remain, they will eventually hone their talent
so that not only does the humiliation go away, but their produce excels.

But the question comes in terms of "openness".  Such trial by fire
challenges, of which humiliation often coincides, is intended to
separate the no- and low-productivity people from the medium to high
productivity people.  But unlike with grain threshing, we really don't
have a way to estimate the produce lost by such methods.

Anecdote:  I'm on a mailing list where "bottom posting" is a rule.  A
person not familiar with even the terms "bottom posting" or "top
posting", subscribed and top posted, setting off a few posts of "don't
do that here, it's against the rules".  And it was accompanied by posts
from several of the more welcoming, less persnickety types who suggested
she should post in whatever way she feels is appropriate and the rules
are really more like guidelines.  (I converted Fernando's top post to a
bottom post just for fun. ;-)  We lost that new person because she was
simultaneously intimidated and irritated.

The general conclusion I've come to (vacillating within those bounds) is
that developer lists can (should?) ethically use humiliation but user
lists should not.

I think  ... I think the irony Russell points out, however, is that
because there are no rules on PLUG-TALK, all the troll-control tools
were/are available, including humiliation.  That means that, well
intentioned as it is, even the mild "on-topic and civil" constraint for
the PLUG list is enough to put it in the sweet spot for attracting
trolls.  To remove it from the sweet spot, you'll have to either add
another, complementary, constraint or remove all constraints.  The
former is more logical.  The "civil and on-topic" constraint has no
teeth.  There are no methods for enforcing it.  Those who obey the rules
must be civil and on-topic.  The outlaws (outrules?) are free to run
wild.  But I'd be open to removing the "civil and on-topic" constraint
as well.

-- 
glen