Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Think about Loose Coupling
 
PerlMonks  

Re: More Non-US Editors Needed?

by demerphq (Chancellor)
on Jun 14, 2002 at 14:48 UTC ( #174547=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to More Non-US Editors Needed?

Hello Footpad,

Ive thought long and hard about how to reply to this node. Frankly I feel that the way that you portray what happened yesterday in the CB is not the way it felt to me (or frankly a number of other monks with whom I discussed the matter in /msg).

Is there a problem?

Well, it all depends on the definition of the term "problem".

  • Will PM fall over or that type of thing due to there not being an editor on hand during the morning hours GMT? No.
  • Are there regular requests for editorial intervention during the morning hours GMT that go unanswered? Yes.
So the question "Is there a problem" depends on your perspective. And this was the root of the dispute that occurred on the CB. A number of monks were saying "There have been many occasions where editors havent been around when it was felt that one was needed." But you came in, frankly in a quite patronizing manner, pooh-poohing us all. Your attitude was "This hasn't affected me thus it can't be a problem." This was despite several monks making the same point.

You then attempted to imply that somehow this was politically motivated (apparently because I said "maybe we should could keep a log, I bet the US editors/monks would be suprised.") which was where I bowed out of the conversation. I dont know what you were thinking (and nor did the several other monks that /msg'd me with things like "What planet is he on") but whatever it was it was wrong, and the smell of the whole thing was both patronizing and insulting.

Is it necessary to have an Editor available at all times?

Actually I would say generally yes. Think of a lifeguard. Most times a lifeguard sits on his (reverse this for female lifeguards :-) chair flirting with girls. His most frequent issue is to dispense bandages to people who have slipped and skinned their knees. Of course this type of stuff could be treated a couple of hours later so most likely it wouldnt matter if the lifeguard only showed up later on. But if the pool only provided a lifeguard when it was really busy then one day someone would drown when the lifeguard wasnt there. Which is why public pools normally provide a lifeguard for all of the hours they are open.

Now granted here at the monastery we dont generally deal with such extreme issues. The most serious are newbies making a mistake and posting real and sensitive data samples in their posts, that and trolls in the CB. But nevertheless these are serious enough issues that there should be IMO only a small probablility that the site is unmonitored by an editor for any reasonable amount of time (at least the probability should be closely related to the size of the comunity likely to be online at a given time, and considering that there are a lot of euromonks....). And by the latter I mean in computer terms, so 15 minutes is probably the right amount of time. Now of course if this site was low volume, if it was only getting a few tens of hits a day such coverage would be both unneccessary and unfeasable. But the fact is that the site is high volume. During the day (GMT) there are usually 10-40 people online. Usually amongst them are monks who are both senior and have been active members for at least a year. Thus there are several if not many monks who could fill this role admirably.

Is there, perhaps, some other way to more widely document the editorial process and how the average monk can use it to best advantage?

No. While such measures may improve peoples understanding of the situation, and probably the associated frustration that it cant be helped, but they dont resolve the fact that someone with the correct permissions needs to be on hand to perform the task.

In general, I don't feel there's a real problem.

This was patently obvious from your responses in the CB to the various monks who think there is.

Slightly more than 20% of the current editors are located internationally

Perhaps. But consider, Corion is often not around in the mornings. Kudra often shows up around mid morning. Davorg doesnt seem to be around much at all these days, nor does neophyte. ar0n is on his way to holland, so that will address matters a bit, but still.(BTW, this is not a criticism of the editors in question I am well aware and understanding of the fact that they are volunteers.)

The current convention of sending private /msg's to one or more editors seems to work well.

During the times you are online Im sure it does. What about when you're not?

Also, I'm not against adding more editors, regardless of location.

That certainly wasnt the way it seemed yesterday. In fact quite the contrary. And again, I am not the only one who thought that.

let's discuss it as a community

Im glad that we are doing so. However lets keep in mind that the community you see and the community that I see can be pretty different. (Actually I have long thought there must be many faces to the monastery. There are active saints who I have _never_ seen online) If only because of the times that we are online. And lets also keep in mind that just becuase you dont see that there is a "problem" that the community it affects may well feel that there is a "problem". Taking other peoples experiences and feelings seriously (which IMO yesterday you did not) is part of being in a community.

Yves / DeMerphq
---
Writing a good benchmark isnt as easy as it might look.


Comment on Re: More Non-US Editors Needed?

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://174547]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others wandering the Monastery: (9)
As of 2014-09-17 12:51 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    How do you remember the number of days in each month?











    Results (79 votes), past polls