The Bikeshed

curiousdannii

3:33 AM

@Zizouz212 I have written it before, and you've read it meta.opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/511/…

overactor

6:23 AM

Has anyone here voted differently on the "Ask Freely" suggestion than tehy did on the "Ask Free" suggestion?

And if so, what's your reasoning?

Martijn

8:56 AM

I upvoted on Ask Free and didn't vote on Ask Freely. Ask Freely conjures too much of don't be afraid to ask anything in my mind, and crosses an arbitrary imaginary line for me that Ask Free just doesn't

@overactor ^

overactor

@Martijn That was basically my reasoning too

which is why I'm surpirsed Ask Freely is ahead by two votes.

Martijn

Ask Freely is more catchy and less awkward I guess

overactor

It rolls a bit better

But I think Ask free sticks better

Martijn

I don't like it because it associates with asking things freely. Others might like it because of that.

reasonable arguments can be made on either side

overactor

compare with:

ask/think differently

vs

ask/think different

@Martijn I will agree there.

Martijn

9:06 AM

hrm

free beer.

/me floats that balloon, and sees where it goes

overactor

I am confused now

Martijn

0

A: More site name brainstorming - Part III

Free Beer The "wrong" side of free as in beer vs free as in freedom, along the same lines of naming for something you don't want, analogous to StackOverflow and ServerFault. Also, who doesn't like free beer?

Martijn

9:24 AM

I've been thinking about the whole problem of conveying the "wrong" image, and how bad it is. How much do we care if people not interested in open culture initially think this site is for something else than open culture vs how much do we care if people who are interested in open source mistake this site for something it's not

IMO, the latter is a far greater concern than the former

differently put, false negatives are far more harmful than false positives.

Obviously, we don't want this site to be flooded by off-topic questions, but as long as it doesn't actively encourage the wrong questions (which is the line ask freely in my guesstimate crosses), I'm far more concerned about being recognizable for people who do want to ask questions within our scope

overactor

You make good points

Martijn

I'll edit the answer to include something like that.

overactor

9:44 AM

@Martijn I'm hestitant to vote on it (up or down) but very interested to see how it will fare.

Martijn

@overactor I edit the answer (twice now) and its rationale is far less rambling now (I think).

overactor

I saw

Martijn

But by all means, if you don't like it, vote it down.

overactor

The latest edit certainly improved it by a lot.

I'm on the fence

Neutral Response

►

Martijn

It took me a bit of editing to actually get to the core of the matter of why I think it's a good name (and for me to actually understand for myself why I like it)

overactor

9:47 AM

Wait no, that's inaccurate

blog.codinghorror.com/rubber-duck-problem-solving

Martijn

the crux of the matter to me is that the free beer analogy is traditionally used to explain things about free culture. And explaing things about free culture is what we do

overactor

I have strong feelings both ways

@Martijn What about casually interested people?

Martijn

The initial appeal should be to experts. We're still shy of that baseline.

Once that baseline is properly fulfilled, the casually interested people will come through organig growth

even if the site were named pile of poo

(which is not to say I would support pile of poo as a name for the site)

as soon as it's google-juiced up, we should be fine

see StackOverflow

I would argue that most people asking questions on SO don't even know what stack overflow is or what usually causes it

but that's irrelevant; they know to go to SO for programming questions, despite the name.

because they know the experts are there

overactor

That's a good point,

but SO had very good advantages over most other platforms when it was young.

Martijn

I'm on a roll with arguments today. I should get this brand of coffee more often

SO was the hyphenated site, but than unsucky

we are not in that position, but we can benefit from the same lessons learned

and the most important one was that if your UX doesn't suck beyond measure (the hyphenated site), and you have the experts, the rest will come naturally

overactor

9:56 AM

I will agree, what we're doing here (or trying to) doesn't exist yet.

Martijn

Also, SO had Spolsky and Attwood behind it, who at the time were among the most influential bloggers around. We don't have that luxury currently (but we should)

overactor

@Martijn Basically, we need FLOSS superstars to get behind us.

Martijn

(which is also by the way why I am still peeved about close rationales like "you'd have to ask the FSF, which are not part of this forum". That's not a close rationale, that's a rationale to get people from the FSF involved)

overactor

@Martijn I agree with that

Asking a question that doesn't have an official answer from FSF but should have one could prove to be of great value.

Martijn

yes. If people like Lessig, Doctorow, etc. etc would be involved, that would be a huge boost for both our credibility and popularity

overactor

10:04 AM

I would like the SE team to make this a little more high profile.

But I understand their reluctance to do so.

Martijn

If we want to be higher profile, we should (rightfully) do that ourselves.

Though SE has a somewhat strained community relationship. Their position on self-governance can be somewhat conflicting at times (yes, they want all community self-governance, all the time. Unless the self-governance wants things that they don't want)

In their defense, community management is extremely tricky

overactor

@Martijn I absolutely agree

It also can't really be compared to something like reddit.

Not every subreddit needs to be helkd to high standards.

The same can not be said for SE sites.

overactor

11:34 AM

@ArtOfCode I won't contest it (mainly since I agree) but I feel liek you might have jumped the gun mod hammering that question closed

hi @flyingsheep !

ArtOfCode

1:17 PM

@overactor Reasoning: I felt it was an almost exact duplicate, and answers on either could have applied on either. Had RubberDuck not edited, I would have edited myself to kick it into the reopen queue - I felt it should be closed, but that the community should still have a say, so I wanted it in the queue.

Martijn

"How do I make sure my project doesn't spuriously set off virus scanners" seems like at best tangentially related to "How do I make sure an open-source project is exploit, backdoor and/or virus free"?

overactor

@Martijn I personally would have closed as off-topic

ArtOfCode

@overactor I wouldn't say it's off-topic, but @Martijn the answers on one are applicable to the other, and solve the problem.

overactor

@Martijn Isn't the phrasing "How do I give evidence that.." though?

ArtOfCode

@overactor @Martijn That was part of my reasoning. The first question asks "how do I give evidence that X is virus-free", the second "how do I give evidence to a virus scanner that X is virus-free".

Martijn

1:23 PM

The answer to one is using static analyses tools like a virus scanner and/or trust the reputation of the publisher. How does that apply to the other?

ArtOfCode

The evidential methods are the same

Martijn

in one case you control the virus scanner/static analysis tool, but have no intention of modifying the source. In the other you control the source, but have no intention of modifying the virus scanner

ArtOfCode

@Martijn Virus scanners work off reputation and static analysis. You give evidence to the scanner by being well-reputed, and letting its static analysis do its work; you give evidence to yourself by doing static analysis and trusting the publisher. They're the same things.

Martijn

So how does the answer to the first question help the asker of the second question

what exactly does he have to do?

ArtOfCode

@Martijn Yet that doesn't make a difference; the methods used are the same. I agree that the problems as posed are different, but their solutions are the same, which is why I closed. I won't recommend you VTR, since you've already done so, but do make that case in a comment, which might persuade others to VTR if they agree.

Martijn

1:26 PM

other than "be trusted by all x" which isn't something you do but the other does

VTR?

ArtOfCode

Vote To Reopen, sorry

Meta Data

3:25 PM

2

Q: Are questions on getting your project "blessed" on scope?

This question was closed How do I make sure my installer doesn't set off virus scanners? as a dupe of How to give evidence that an open-source project is reputable? Personally, I think there's a subtle enough difference to disagree with the duplicate identification and it seems well ...

kdopen

@ArtOfCode On the meta question: I'm torn. I tried to write the question itself in an unbiased way, giving pros and cons. But as I commented on the main question, I feel the question itself should be closed - just not as a dupe

OTOH these are precisely the kind of question that new FLOSS project "managers" need help answering. Is the site's brief simply to answer questions, or is it to encourage and foster FLOSS development and adoption?

ArtOfCode

@kdopen I don't know... I think my stance has changed since that ^ discussion, and I think you're right.

@kdopen That sounds like a prime candidate for another meta post.

kdopen

or an answer to the "getting started" post as otherwise it's a dupe

or do you mean about the site's goals?

ArtOfCode

The site's goals. Because that somewhat affects what we make on and off topic

kdopen

You or me?

ArtOfCode

3:31 PM

You or me what?

kdopen

to ask

ArtOfCode

I'll write it up

kdopen

K

and I'll probably answer :)

ArtOfCode

0

Q: What should our site goals be?

After some small amount of discussion on this meta post and here in chat, I have a question for the community here. What are our goals? As a Stack Exchange site, we're here to answer on-topic questions about free/open projects to the highest quality possible. But is that all we are? kdopen su...

discussion featured

kdopen

ta muchly

Meta Data

3:54 PM

1

Q: What should our site goals be?

After some small amount of discussion on this meta post and here in chat, I have a question for the community here. What are our goals? As a Stack Exchange site, we're here to answer on-topic questions about free/open projects to the highest quality possible. But is that all we are? kdopen su...

discussion featured

RubberDuck

@ArtOfCode they're not the same. Only the publisher can request a whitelist from many of the vendors. That is the answer I was going to post if no one else did.

Regardless, I had another goal with that question.

ArtOfCode

@RubberDuck That being?

RubberDuck

I'm really glad @kdopen posted that meta. I wanted to test the waters to see if we consider it on topic.

ArtOfCode

Go stick an answer on it then :)

RubberDuck

I'm gonna. Just gotta work for a bit. I have a feeling that I'll answer the other meta too.

Honestly, the other one may come first, because it directly affects the on/off topicness of my question.

kdopen

4:27 PM

answers up :)

@RubberDuck Please chime in - those two question shsouldn't be a discussion between @ArtOfCode and I :)

RubberDuck

4:52 PM

@kdopen I will. Give me time. I'll be back this evening.

Transcript for