I have large respect for Tichodroma. He was willing to actively voice his concerns, and while I disagreed with a lot that he had, he helped the community get a bigger picture of what we needed
@ArtOfCode Not really. I still feel like the claims of big infighting on this site have been exaggerated, but we're all agreed that we want the scope and site to be welcoming to all
Now if you could come up with a magical new term for FLOSSetc that everyone will love that will help :P
I wonder if we should go more in the direction of "Ask Different"... have a title that has no direct connection to the topic
@curiousdannii I tend to agree. I haven't seen any major fighting, though I have noted several smaller issues which could have done with prompter resolution.
For both the FSF and OSI we have a few set of related tags:
free-software, fsf, free-software-definition
osi, open-source-definition
I created the two -definition tags, as I thought they were more appropriate for questions concerning the definitions than the straight fsf and osi tags, which c...
Since there are still many people unsatisfied with the current site name, I thought it would be good to have a centralised place for some brainstorming. If you have any ideas, please post them below! And please vote up and down the options you like/dislike.
This is not the place to argue for any...
> Maybe a solution could be a translation platform with "points", where people would earn points for good translations, and give their points as "bounty" to the project+language of their choice?
@curiousdannii No worries, we just don't want edits to become a contentious issue that overshadows more important things.
@curiousdannii The first link you've given: I'd agree with you there, gamification was justified. I've rolled back. The others, however, I'd uphold.
854 (the second link) was originally license-recommendation based on a misconception. Having cleared that up in comments, the remaining issue was a more general licensing issue.
And the final link, 826, definitely has to do with collaboration.
I figure if at least Open Source has a strong beta and wouldn't mind being called out in our Help Center, then I would say we propose making all licensing questions off-topic and direct people there (like how we direct people to The Workplace or Stack Overflow for certain questions). Then, we can historical lock a bunch of old questions because that whole thing becomes not confusing.
I took the gamification tag out because it was looking for an external platform that was ramified with other contributors: the gamification was not specific to the open source project
It was about encouraging translations, but the op was asking for an external gamified translation platform
> here are tens of translation platforms with the same features as the one we are using, so if your answer is to suggest another one, please make sure to explain how it is different, thanks! Maybe a solution could be a translation platform with "points", where people would earn points for good translations, and give their points as "bounty" to the project+language of their choice?
There's that, but his app is an android app
That's the target application, and here we're looking for a platform that will help. Gamification is not related to the open source platform, but rather this external platform that will help the project
He's not developing that external translation platform, but rather the android app
This is the revision it was added. The paragraph about the gamification was added by the OP, the editor (wonder who that might be...) added a relevant tag.
Here's an analogy: I'm not going to give the tag popcorn to my question because I'm looking for a platform to help me do math. Perhaps, to encourage: it offers popcorn? It doesn't make much sense
Well. Controversial tag edit, so here's a controversial solution: how about we all stop appeasing our sense of duty, stop arguing about what's right when it's perfectly good enough, and leave it alone?
I think that the question has uncovered an issue with how the author advertizes the translations of the app - gamifying the translation and advertizing that might solve this. actually
@Zizouz212 If it's because curiousdannii's bugging you about things, don't worry. One user matters not. Yes, you had some downvotes, but you also had more upvotes than most, and I think you'd be a good mod.
@TrevorClarke You do also have 3 upvotes, so you're not doing terribly
Here there's been more activity, but I've also started to see that people aren't wary that they are on the internet, and then there are the disputes between users and such
I'm not 100% respected. Anywhere. Including here. There are probably plenty of people here I've disagreed with and they've not respected me or my opinions, but I'm not going to let them get in my way. I can do a good job anyway, and so can you.
Seriously, opinion: you don't need 100% respect to be a mod. People are going to hate you whatever you do, just ignore them. If some of the top users on the site think you'd make a good mod, you probably will - and there are plenty of top users rooting for you here.
@TrevorClarke To be honest, I think you would be a good mod as well. You're very calm about things, and even though you're looking new to this site, you'd be good in the tasks of a moderator
@ArtOfCode I don't think I'll undelete it, I think I'm just going to think it over
@TrevorClarke It won't be until we go public, at least. Hopefully we don't have a third week of private, which would mean we go public tomorrow or Wednesday, but we've just got to wait and see. They might also take longer about it to see if things settle.
@overactor I don't find that a very big problem. Of course, it would be nice to have a moderator with experience, but I think that three rookie moderators would do a great job. Sites can vary greatly from each other, and, while past moderator experience can help, it can't fully prepare you to moderate another different site. — michaelpri11 hours ago
@Zizouz212 Give it some consideration. I think you'd make an excellent mod; so do plenty of others here. At least consider it, if the team do ask you to step up.
I did, because I think the you'd be a good mod and the community should have somewhere to express that. You're on +4/-1 plus my vote is +5/-1: looking strong.
If you like, you can edit that post with a note saying you're unsure. Something like you'd be willing to consider it if the community team consider you.
@ArtOfCode Or morning, as the case may be. I actually have to run to a meeting just now but I'll be back shortly. tl;dr: I haven't decided on yours yet
@TrevorClarke Some people just form opinions, which you can't do much about. Don't worry about it. In the end, it's the community team that decides, so if they think you'd be a good mod then they'll pick you.
Votes are useful guides for them from the people who've been here right the way through, but if they prefer one user over another they're in their rights to say "we'll do what we want" xD
@ArtOfCode OK so what I'm trying to remember re: your nomination is whether you voted to close the previous nomination thread or not. I can't see the deleted history to check.
I know we disagreed about whether it was too early or not but can't recall who, other than Madara Uchiha, were the voters, and I wanted to remember to check later and see who was quick to nominate themselves the second time around...
@Air I was fairly quick to nominate myself, I'll admit, but mainly because I was here when @michaelpri brought up the subject of a new nominations post.
Also @Air While you're here, what did you mean by this?
> In the interest of explaining a downvote, while I have no doubts about this user's level of interest or engagement, my strong impression has been one of quantity over quality
I've also read a couple of your answers (one of my own question, so that's easy to find) where you cited the same reference given by the author of the question.
That strongly suggests you rushed to answer without thoroughly digesting the problem statement.
Of course, sometimes people don't read their own references fully when they ask, but in that case usually the answers will at least acknowledge, "here's the same link you had, you missed something, look at this" because they realize it's odd to post the same link.
I want to be clear, it's not a problem to ask quickly or to answer quickly. Everything gets evaluated on the basis of whether it's useful, and so as long as the site's healthy, voting evens it out.
Some of the highest-voted answers on SO are really fast and off-the-cuff quotes from documentation, after all. They are useful.
But at the risk of being cliche, moderation is at as much about when and why you choose not to act, as it is about what actions you actually take.
Ok, I don't entirely remember myself answering that completely, but I'll tell you this: Generally when people reference, I don't normally bother going to the link, mostly because I assume that the OP places all, or the relevant quotations within the post
I likely wrote that answer because I probably saw a misunderstanding in what happened, and I acknowledged that I was unsure of the second question you had.
Generally, I do take some time to research the subject, however if it falls under a clear view of required expertise, I'll share my thoughts and normally acknowledge that I have nothing else to share
The Bikeshed
The Bikeshed