Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:101517
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.49 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPKYkKzdFp2W8aNPWg5eq3vk+p_3o6cCj6vdjPYbLrq2xEzrKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF+90c8j8G6QBTkhw8dqUiqLjQTuUqOFfCsTo_G6wgK40_JXMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFMT4No_KONiWp-DGX2pN6x=zPmRgCQxzDYVbk6-Sa=dcPoJMA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADMz3wcxPwRm+14Y88=FO92ftumy55B2i4AtLr-eD9_CQHUmOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <F36F3023-9737-41FD-9267-EA0840836D21@gmail.com> <CAPKYkKyttPAXT-ZsxT2O3Cja9MKsqo13qR7Ggpv_qWfOFzyVew@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEUnE0cdyet4RgvNOy40WG=De+hKzV1pYoY4hjBQw=OsFhDrSw@mail.gmail.com> <CAPKYkKzdFp2W8aNPWg5eq3vk+p_3o6cCj6vdjPYbLrq2xEzrKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 17:52:53 +0000
Message-ID: <CALKiJKrGqfEhiP6XnXzVnD2ZqyGuKbUuU_EdYxQpHmUo4krriA@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1959948a3eb40561e2e215"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Mailing list moderation
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

--94eb2c1959948a3eb40561e2e215
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On 3 January 2018 at 17:28, Chase Peeler <chasepeeler@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think self moderation still solves this. If the person is disruptive
> enough, eventually enough people will block them and there won't be many
> instances of them getting quoted or poisoning the thread.
>
> If certain people decide to engage them, then others will start to block
> them as well.



That all sounds like a lot of wasted effort. If we're not careful,
endorsing that behaviour would end up with people sharing mail filter
definitions, proxying the list through a shared filter, or just setting up
a rival discussion forum. All of which just distract us further from making
PHP better.



> Maybe, maybe not. Either way, I don't want you making that decision for
> me.  I should be allowed to determine at which point someone's negative
> contributions outweigh their positive ones to a point that I no longer feel
> they are productive.
>


I think maybe we have a different view of what a list like this is. To me,
it's a forum where we're collaborating to a common aim; it has an existence
in its own right, and we collectively shape that existence. I may be
misunderstanding, but it sounds like you view it more as a public space
where you can find individuals to communicate with, and you retain the
right to shape those communications. Does that sound a reasonable
characterisation? I'm not seeking to criticise, only to understand where
this idea of "making the decision for me" comes from, because to me,
moderation doesn't seem like a personal decision which is being taken away.

Regards,
-- 
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]

--94eb2c1959948a3eb40561e2e215--