| ▲ | SpicyLemonZest 15 hours ago | |||||||
Have you ever been on the moderator side of this? There's ultimately no perfectly polite and collegial way to say "we've heard your concerns, but this is our decision and it's not subject to your review". Being more direct about it would only have inflamed the situation further. | ||||||||
| ▲ | JuniperMesos 9 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||
My actual opinion here is that Github issue threads shouldn't exist at all; and pretty much all online communication should be redesigned in such a way as to prevent anyone taking the role of a moderator to lock down a coherent comment thread from everyone else who wants to participate. (I agree this is a hard chat UX problem). In my ideal world, instead of having Github accounts everyone in the thread would be posting under their own personal ID (in a way similar to ATProto, Nostr, etc.), using a discussion UX that would allow Soller to seamlessly continue the thread along with any other willing participants even after the systemd maintainers blocked it from their own end (which is their right to do). Perhaps if systemd entirely forked over this, this issue comment thread could seamlessly transition into a new issue on the fork, to serve as documentation for why the fork works the way it does. In general, sometimes the best response to a moderator banning some kind of discussion is for everyone who is subject to that ban to fork the discussion thread itself; and online communication software should more readily facilitate this. | ||||||||
| ||||||||