[CentOS-devel] Talk about existing forums

[Akemi Yagi]

[preamble] Top posting is intentional. No trimming is intentional.
This is because I am trying to beat the proverbial dead horse (quoting
P.S. referring to this thread). [/preamble]

I strongly feel that each CentOS forum moderator should have an e-mail
address that can be used for "official" CentOS business. I am not
repeating why because it is well explained in the conversation below,
which I posted over 4 months ago.

This subject came back recently in the moderators' thread because we
want to post our contact info in a visible place (Readme First - forum
guidelines) so that forum users can easily find the way to reach us.
We thought about using the PM.  But it is not only a suboptimal method
but is now totally broken and unusable.

It is our sincere hope that the CentOS core admins give this request a
serious consideration.

Thanks,

Akemi

On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 1:21 AM, Akemi Yagi <amyagi at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 12:13 AM, Akemi Yagi <amyagi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Before the KB's message was posted to this mailing list, there was a
>> conversation among the people who participated in the chat. I am now
>> trying to paste the content of what we discussed in that conversation
>> for everyone to see.
>
> That was the first part of the conversation. Here's the second (and
> the last) part.
>
> Akemi
>
> ========================
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:41:36AM +0000, Ned Slider wrote:
>
> Karanbir,
>
> One issue I'd like to raise (again) that I forgot to raise yesterday
> during the call is use of "company" email. I raised this before and I
> think it was misunderstood (given the public belittling I received),
> maybe because CentOS currently associates @centos.org email addresses
> with other roles.
>
> But there are times when forum moderators will be required to
> communicate with members by email, and it is only professional and
> right to provide a tool to do that job. It is unfair (and
> unprofessional) to expect moderators to correspond with their own
> email addresses when conducting business on behalf of the CentOS
> forums, and I know Phil S has also raised the issue before,
> understandably not wanting to use his nasa.gov address for such
> activities.
>
> If an @centos.org implies something more privileged then I would
> suggest an alternative domain or subdomain such as @centosforums.org
> or @forums.centos.org, something that can be more clearly associated
> with the role in question. In my not so humble experience, when you
> don't give people the right tools to do the job they very quickly get
> fed up doing said job and move on. Of course there is an implicit
> understanding that such email addresses are only used when
> appropriate, but IMHO it's a tool that needs to be made available to
> forum moderators.
>
> ==================
> Scott Robbins wrote:
>
>> One issue I'd like to raise (again) that I forgot to raise yesterday
>> during the call is use of "company" email. I raised this before and I
>> think it was misunderstood (given the public belittling I received),
>> maybe because CentOS currently associates @centos.org email addresses
>> with other roles.
>
> Not having seen that conversation, I'm a bit shocked that something so
> obvious would be belittled.  Do mods have to communicate with members
> using their own email addresses?  If I were an unruly member, and
> received an email from say, Ned, at his own email address, I'd be more
> likely to send back a nasty answer, saying, in part, how do I know
> you're from CentOS and not someone else with a similar username?
>
> That one goes without saying. As Ned suggests, if there's special
> criteria for a centos.org address, then create a centosforums.org or
> something similar.
>
> I'm sorry that I'm seeming so negative about all these things, but
> again, it comes from experience doing it the other way.
>
>> to provide a tool to do that job. It is unfair (and unprofessional) to
>> expect moderators to correspond with their own email addresses when
>> conducting business on behalf of the CentOS forums, and I know Phil S
>> has also raised the issue before, understandably not wanting to use his
>> nasa.gov address for such activities.
>
> As I always say, (stolen from Cracked.com, but so often applicable to
> technology), "What could possibly go wrong with that?"
>
> And the answer certainly should not be, tell him to get a gmail address
> to use.  That's saying, We don't appreciate your work.  You want to
> help, it's up to you to get the tools.
>
>> If an @centos.org implies something more privileged then I would suggest
>> an alternative domain or subdomain such as @centosforums.org or
>> @forums.centos.org, something that can be more clearly associated with
>> the role in question. In my not so humble experience, when you don't
>> give people the right tools to do the job they very quickly get fed up
>> doing said job and move on.
>
> See my earlier email. Extremely valid point.  People are doing this out
> of their own goodness.
>
>
> Of course there is an implicit understanding
>> that such email addresses are only used when appropriate, but IMHO it's
>> a tool that needs to be made available to forum moderators.
>
> One other possibility, and what we use in the Fedora forums, is the
> Private Message option.  When a member commits an infringement, they're
> given a private message from staff which is usually also shown to other
> staff in the staff lounge.  The member's response is also printed.
>
> That's not quite essential, in most cases, general summations are
> acceptable save when the member gives an unacceptable response, such as
> the one who accusesd us of being in the pay of RedHat.  (Which was more
> amusing than aggravating, causing a lot of wasted posts about, "Where's
> my cut?"  And someone else answering, "You didn't get it?  Ooops, never
> mind."
>
> While members have the option of turning off PMs, it is expected that
> will leave the default of accepting PMs from staff.
>
> =================
> Ned Slider wrote:
>
> I'm talking specifically about situations where members may not have
> access to the forums so email is the only form of communicating - such
> as notifying a member he's received a temp ban for some infringement
> of rules, or confirming a members identity who's lost access to their
> registered email account and forgotten their password - surprising how
> often that happens!
>
> =================
> End of paste
>