On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 5:19 AM, Andreas Orphanides <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I think imposing strictures on the voting process goes a little bit against
> something fundamental about Code4Lib's anarcho-democratic underpinnings.
>

Agreed. But as the size of the community increases, you eventually get to
the point where using popularity as the ultimate gauge waters things down.

The thing I've always liked best about c4l is the opportunity to get
exposed to questions/things that I didn't know I needed to think about in
first place. Word gets around, so if I know that people are working on
something that's relevant to what I'm doing, I'll just read up and maybe
contact a few knowledgeable people directly. If too many people come just
to learn about what interests them, I'm trying to figure out how that
doesn't undermine the community since things only work when enough people
are contributing whatever they have to offer.

To me, the real value of c4l is talking to people who are lit up about
something that's totally off my radar -- they help me understand what I
need to be interested in. In return, I share cornball ideas which may have
applications that would not otherwise be apparent to me or the person I'm
talking with. For stuff that's already on my radar, the internet strikes me
a handy tool...

As the population increases, the weird, difficult to understand, and edgy
stuff gets weeded out and if we're not careful, the result will just
another online conference. After all, if popularity is the path to the best
stuff, Mickey D's serves the best food and Bud Light is the best beer.

I don't know what should be done, but the splash screen is a good step if
it helps remind people what the real point is.

kyle