Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
There's more than one way to do things
 
PerlMonks  

Moderation of Open Source projects

by zby (Vicar)
on Feb 05, 2008 at 12:14 UTC ( [id://666267]=perlmeditation: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

So far all of the answers to Choosing modules - community matters or just technical merits? agree that the health of the communities around the code has a huge impact on the code itself. So here is a follow up to that question - do you consciously employ some social techniques to improve the communities around the libraries that you depend on? Do you have ideas for such techniques?

Being recently trapped into a very heated discussion I wished there were some respected Perl leaders who would volunteer to step in and mediate. Do you think such a custom could work? Or perhaps TPF could offer a grant not to a Perl developer for coding but to a professional moderator for improving the communication in some important Perl projects?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Moderation in Open Source projects
by moritz (Cardinal) on Feb 05, 2008 at 12:48 UTC
    The problem with moderation is that all parties have to accept the moderator.

    If people were wise enough to know that they need a moderator, you wouldn't need that moderator most of the time.

    But I agree that there are still many situations were such a moderator could relax a discussion.

    BTW I think that TimToady does a great job in the discussions he's involved in. Most of the time he waits until most of the technical points are mentioned at least once, and picks the most important once, usually making clear why they are that important. And I never saw him insult anybody.

    That's why you don't see many flames on the perl6-* lists, compared to the flame wars on the lkml where Linus Torvalds is involved ;-)

Re: Moderation of Open Source projects
by perrin (Chancellor) on Feb 05, 2008 at 21:05 UTC
    It's tough to recommend general techniques for something like this other than "don't be a jerk." I'll share a couple of ideas that I've formed after years of mailing list interaction.

    1) Be strategic. Sometimes it's not worth pursuing an argument if that will alienate people who are valuable to the project. You have to pick your battles. Often this means letting other people get the last word. If you've said your point, let them say theirs. You don't have to nitpick every single thing they say to you.

    2) Let people save face. If you argue with people in a way that gets their back up, you will never win the argument. You have to give them a way to agree with you without totally humiliating themselves. That may mean checking over your own mails before sending to make sure you didn't say something obnoxious out of anger. Your mail will probably be sent to many people and archived on Google forever, and a nasty tone will probably not help you win the argument. It will inspire the other person to resist your ideas more.

    Also, sometimes you have to walk away. If a project is full of people who drive you crazy and reading the mailing list makes your blood boil, stop reading it. Find a different project to put your time into. Life's too short.

      ++ If only I had the wisdom to follow your words and bite my tongue.
    A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
Re: Moderation of Open Source projects
by stvn (Monsignor) on Feb 05, 2008 at 15:30 UTC
    Being recently trapped into a very heated discussion I wished there were some respected Perl leaders who would volunteer to step in and mediate. Do you think such a custom could work?

    No, I think it would fail miserably. First of all, just because someone is a "respected perl leader" does not mean that they should have any say in the matter. Especially if it is not their module and/or they are not directly involved in the project.

    Or perhaps TPF could offer a grant not to a Perl developer for coding but to a professional moderator for improving the communication in some important Perl projects?

    Please, please, no. If two (or more) adults cannot settle an argument between themselves, what makes you think a professional moderator would actually help? To start with, you would be hard pressed to find a professional moderator with enough technical knowledge to actually do the job correctly, and as the other posters pointed out, both parties must agree to use the moderator.

    And who gets to determine what is and what isn't an "important Perl project"? What is important to me as a web developer may not be important to someone who is primarily a system administrator or someone who works in bio-tech, etc etc.

    Heated discussions with assholes is one of those universal constants of the open source world, I suggest you get used to it and/or learn to avoid getting into those discussions.

    Remember, if I release my code open source, I am giving you many hours of my hard work for free, a sparkling personality costs extra.

    -stvn
      just because someone is a "respected perl leader" does not mean that they should have any say in the matter.

      A moderator's job isn't there to decide anything, but to improve communication.

      Please, please, no. If two (or more) adults cannot settle an argument between themselves, what makes you think a professional moderator would actually help?

      So you think that professional moderators are entirely worthless?

      Actually in many cases moderators help to stop strikes, when the involved parties are at odds with each other. (At least that's common practice here in Germany).

      To start with, you would be hard pressed to find a professional moderator with enough technical knowledge to actually do the job correctly

      Agreed, that could be real problem.

        just because someone is a "respected perl leader" does not mean that they should have any say in the matter.
        A moderator's job isn't there to decide anything, but to improve communication.

        Last I checked, there was no "respected perl leader" that was also a professional moderator. Assuming that $repsected_perl_leaders[ rand() ] has enough free time to waste on people who are most likely just being ridiculous and immature, why would they want too? Adults should be able to settle their differences, or be smart/mature enough to just walk away.

        Please, please, no. If two (or more) adults cannot settle an argument between themselves, what makes you think a professional moderator would actually help?
        So you think that professional moderators are entirely worthless?

        Actually in many cases moderators help to stop strikes, when the involved parties are at odds with each other. (At least that's common practice here in Germany).

        Moderators are not worthless, in something important like a strike. But a "professional moderator" being pulled in because someone got yelled at on a mailing list by someone else who was likely just having a bad day, that's a little silly.

        Open source software is "free" in terms of money, but not in terms of developer time and effort. If I choose to use an open source project, it is ultimately my responsibility to make it work, and not the responsibility of the author. There is a reason why people put things like this at the end of their modules:

        BECAUSE THIS SOFTWARE IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE SOFTWARE, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE SOFTWARE "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE SOFTWARE IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE SOFTWARE PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR, OR CORRECTION.

        IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR REDISTRIBUTE THE SOFTWARE AS PERMITTED BY THE ABOVE LICENCE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE SOFTWARE (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE SOFTWARE TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER SOFTWARE), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

        -stvn
Re: Moderation of Open Source projects
by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Feb 05, 2008 at 14:27 UTC
    Put your money where your mouth is. If there are "libraries that you depend on", then you (or your employer) have a financial stake in the success of the library. Given that, I have found that financial support of a community is one of the best ways to improve the health of a community. It can be poisonous if the person giving the support tries to be a director instead of a producer, but most people haven't shown the desire to do that.

    My criteria for good software:
    1. Does it work?
    2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?
Re: Moderation of Open Source projects
by marcussen (Pilgrim) on Feb 06, 2008 at 00:21 UTC
    I have noticed that several projects now deploy their own code of conduct which you are expected to adhere to in order to be heard or be able to contribute to said project. Whether or not this will be effective in the long run remains to be seen.

    while ( whoring ){ for ( xp ){ grep /the source/,@perlmonks; }}
Re: Moderation of Open Source projects
by adamk (Chaplain) on Feb 08, 2008 at 04:56 UTC
    For what it's worth, I ended up doing the arbitration for Catalyst when there was a falling out and each side owned half of the Catalyst namespaces.

    It took two days to come to an agreement...

    In that case, the arbitration works well because:

    1. Neither side could release

    2. Both sides could destroy Catalyst

    3. Catalyst is important to Perl

    4. As a CPAN admin, I had the relevant blessings and powers to actually fix the problem once they came to an agreement.

    If the problem comes down to a CPAN permissions/control/ownership issue, I'm happy to step in and do so again.

    (Step one of the arbitration is of course making sure that both sides are happy for you to do the arbitration)

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: perlmeditation [id://666267]
Approved by moritz
Front-paged by moritz
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others cooling their heels in the Monastery: (4)
As of 2024-03-29 01:33 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found