Alan Reiner [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2014-03-25 📝 Original message:I would echo the need for ...
📅 Original date posted:2014-03-25
📝 Original message:I would echo the need for some kind of moderation.
I believe Peter Todd is an extremely intelligent individual, who has a
lot to offer the Bitcoin community. He has a firm grasp of a lot of
really deep Bitcoin concepts and his *technical* insight is generally
positive. Technically. But the way he communicates on this list is
*extremely* corrosive and breeds hostility. It makes it a scary place
to discuss things, with frequent, public ridicule of everything posted.
I agree that I would rather have a friendly environment to discuss
technicals, even if it means losing additional technical insight.
People who would explicitly insult other contributors intelligence and
character on a public list should be subject to some kind of negative
reinforcement. Maybe there's solutions other than outright banning.
-Alan
On 03/25/2014 01:37 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Peter Todd <pete at petertodd.org> wrote:
>> For someone with 'Chief Scientist' as their job title, I'm surprised you
>> think so little of hard evidence and so much of idol worshipping.
> Peter, take this unprofessional, personal crap off-list.
>
> Mike's anecdote of hostility is not an isolated one. Just today, a
> bitcore developer commented on "Peter Todd's ..apocalyptic vision
> and... negative view on bitcoin" which turned off some other
> developers from participating more interactively.
>
> As I commented on IRC, open source projects are no strangers to people
> who simultaneously (a) make useful contributions and (b) turn
> potential contributors away with an abrasive or hostile attitude
> toward others. It's an unsolved problem in OSS, that I saw for 15+
> years in the Linux kernel community.
>
> For this list, as Mike suggested on IRC, introducing an openly stated
> moderation policy may be the one route.
>
📝 Original message:I would echo the need for some kind of moderation.
I believe Peter Todd is an extremely intelligent individual, who has a
lot to offer the Bitcoin community. He has a firm grasp of a lot of
really deep Bitcoin concepts and his *technical* insight is generally
positive. Technically. But the way he communicates on this list is
*extremely* corrosive and breeds hostility. It makes it a scary place
to discuss things, with frequent, public ridicule of everything posted.
I agree that I would rather have a friendly environment to discuss
technicals, even if it means losing additional technical insight.
People who would explicitly insult other contributors intelligence and
character on a public list should be subject to some kind of negative
reinforcement. Maybe there's solutions other than outright banning.
-Alan
On 03/25/2014 01:37 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Peter Todd <pete at petertodd.org> wrote:
>> For someone with 'Chief Scientist' as their job title, I'm surprised you
>> think so little of hard evidence and so much of idol worshipping.
> Peter, take this unprofessional, personal crap off-list.
>
> Mike's anecdote of hostility is not an isolated one. Just today, a
> bitcore developer commented on "Peter Todd's ..apocalyptic vision
> and... negative view on bitcoin" which turned off some other
> developers from participating more interactively.
>
> As I commented on IRC, open source projects are no strangers to people
> who simultaneously (a) make useful contributions and (b) turn
> potential contributors away with an abrasive or hostile attitude
> toward others. It's an unsolved problem in OSS, that I saw for 15+
> years in the Linux kernel community.
>
> For this list, as Mike suggested on IRC, introducing an openly stated
> moderation policy may be the one route.
>