 |
 |
It should be noted that @poledance really was originally named @rsinger. See * https://github.com/code4lib/supybot-plugins/commit/7ae336cc37a7bbd41e4899f1ca90fb43b12acf46 * and https://github.com/code4lib/supybot-plugins/commit/90e7d0f2bbb5f8a30c43a6177fb3d4eb7bcb46b1 . On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Jonathan Rochkind <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > I agree with Ed. > > Thanks to whoever removed the 'poledance' plugin (REALLY? that existed? if > it makes you feel any better, I don't think anyone who hangs out in > #code4lib even knew it existed, and it never got used). > > It's certainly possible that there are or will be other individual > features that are, well, just plain rude and offensive, and should be > removed. > > But in general, I think it would be a HUGE mistake to think that all > personality, frivolity, or 'subcultural' elements should be removed from > all things #code4lib in the name of 'accessiblity'. Whatever it is about > code4lib that has made it 'succesful' -- is in large part due to the fact > that it IS a social community with cultural features. If you try to remove > all those, you are removing what makes code4lib what it is, you are > removing whatever you liked about it in the first place. > > If you want online or offline venues that are all-business-all-the-time > with no social subcultural aspects, there are plenty of others already, you > don't need to make code4lib into one. If you find those "plenty of others" > not as useful or rewarding as code4lib -- well, I suggest the reason for > that has a lot to do with the social community aspects of code4lib. YES, > the social subcultural aspects WILL turn some people off, it's true, but by > trying to remove them, you wind up with something that doesn't rub people > the wrong way and doens't rub anyone the right way either. > > > On 1/22/2013 1:25 PM, Edward M. Corrado wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Kyle Banerjee <[log in to unmask]> >> wrote: >> >>> In every "noisy" forum that I participate in (BTW, none of them are tech >>> or >>> even work related), there are always people who dislike the noise. The >>> concerns are analogous to the ones expressed here -- irritation factor, >>> it >>> keeps people away, it's all about the "in" crowd, etc. Likewise, the >>> proposed solutions are similar to ones that have been floated here like >>> directing the noisemaking from the main group elsewhere or silencing it. >>> >>> For things to work, everyone needs a reason to be there. People with less >>> experience need access to those who have been around the block. But a >>> diet >>> of repetitive shop talk isn't very interesting for people who have a >>> decent >>> handle on what they're doing. They need something else to keep them >>> there, >>> and in the final analysis, many come for entertainment -- this normally >>> manifests itself in the form of high noise levels. But even if people >>> spend >>> the vast bulk of the time playing around, nuggets of wisdom are shared. >>> And >>> if something's truly serious, it gets attention. >>> >>> It's far better to help people learn to tune out what they don't like, >>> and >>> this is much easier to do in c4l than in communities where interaction is >>> primarily physical. All communities have their own character and >>> communication norms. It's important for people to be mindful of the >>> environment they're helping create, but reducing communication to help >>> avoid exposing people to annoyances screws things up. >>> >>> In all honesty, I think the silliness on the sidelines is far more >>> important than the formal stuff. I know I learn a lot more while goofing >>> off than in formal channels for pretty much everything I do. >>> >>> kyle >>> >> >> +1 >> >> I'm all for removing specific offended responses and commands as some >> others have suggested, but I agree trying to remove some of the >> lighter stuff will in the long term, be more likely to be detrimental >> then a positive. >> >> >>