From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: xor@freenetproject.org, bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
In-Reply-To: <2998879.R5sQRbxZRv@1337h4x0r>
References: <87si1rycux.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <2998879.R5sQRbxZRv@1337h4x0r>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.20.2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.5.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 15:14:47 +1030
Message-ID: <87powvy20w.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Three Month bitcoin-dev Moderation Review
Precedence: list

xor--- via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> writes:
> On Thursday, January 21, 2016 11:20:46 AM Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> So, what should moderation look like from now on?
>
> The original mail which announced moderation contains this rule:
>> - Generally discouraged: [...], +1s, [...]
>
> I assume "+1s" means statements such as "I agree with doing X".
>
> Any sane procedure of deciding something includes asking the involved people 
> whether they're for or against it.
> If there are dozens of proposals on how to solve a particular technical 
> problem, how else do you want to decide it than having a vote?

+1s here means simpling say "+1" or "me too" that carries no additional
information.  ie. if you like an idea, that's great, but it's not worth
interruping the entire list for.

If you say "I prefer proposal X over Y because <reasons>" that's
different.  As is "I dislike X because <reasons>" or "I need X because
<reasons>".

Hope that clarifies!
Rusty.