[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 >