Conversation

Notices

Embed this notice
Carlton Gibson 🇪🇺 (carlton@fosstodon.org)'s status on Thursday, 02-Jan-2025 05:48:26 JST Carlton Gibson 🇪🇺

Rereading “Working in Public”. I remember being enthused by it first time round. Several years later it just reads like a dystopian hellscape.
> While some like to grumble at GitHub’s homogenizing effects, what happened in open source isn’t much different from what happened to the rest of the internet. Before platforms, our online world was a scattered collection of forums, blogs, personal websites.
Auh-huh… 😳

In conversation about 5 months ago from fosstodon.org permalink
- Embed this notice
  Carlton Gibson 🇪🇺 (carlton@fosstodon.org)'s status on Thursday, 02-Jan-2025 05:48:24 JST Carlton Gibson 🇪🇺
  in reply to
  
  > “If it’s not fun anymore, you get literally nothing from maintaining a popular package.”
  🥺
  
  In conversation about 5 months ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Carlton Gibson 🇪🇺 (carlton@fosstodon.org)'s status on Thursday, 02-Jan-2025 05:48:25 JST Carlton Gibson 🇪🇺
  in reply to
  
  This is probably worth looking at for us:
  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7282
  In conversation about 5 months ago permalink
  Attachments
  1. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: static.ietf.org
    
    RFC 7282: On Consensus and Humming in the IETF
    
    from Pete Resnick
    
    The IETF has had a long tradition of doing its technical work through a consensus process, taking into account the different views among IETF participants and coming to (at least rough) consensus on technical matters. In particular, the IETF is supposed not to be run by a "majority rule" philosophy. This is why we engage in rituals like "humming" instead of voting. However, more and more of our actions are now indistinguishable from voting, and quite often we are letting the majority win the day without consideration of minority concerns. This document explains some features of rough consensus, what is not rough consensus, how we have gotten away from it, how we might think about it differently, and the things we can do in order to really achieve rough consensus. Note: This document is quite consciously being put forward as Informational. It does not propose to change any IETF processes and is therefore not a BCP. It is simply a collection of principles, hopefully around which the IETF can come to (at least rough) consensus.
- Embed this notice
  Carlton Gibson 🇪🇺 (carlton@fosstodon.org)'s status on Thursday, 02-Jan-2025 05:48:25 JST Carlton Gibson 🇪🇺
  in reply to
  
  > On a bigger project, getting even one small contribution merged in can be a status symbol.
  It’s quite normal that it’s not easy.
  In conversation about 5 months ago permalink
  Attachments
  1. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: www.symbol.it
    
    Site en construction
    
    from OVHcloud
- Embed this notice
  Carlton Gibson 🇪🇺 (carlton@fosstodon.org)'s status on Thursday, 02-Jan-2025 05:48:26 JST Carlton Gibson 🇪🇺
  in reply to
  
  > We can see this difficulty expressed in the task of implementing and enforcing codes of conduct: policies that govern acceptable behavior for a community.
  That too, yep.
  
  In conversation about 5 months ago permalink
  
  Blaise Pabón - controlpl4n3 repeated this.

Public

Conversation

Notices

Feeds