[WFS-India] Suggestion for re-modelling of the mailing list rules

[Kaustav Das Modak]

On Friday 21 June 2013 10:59 PM, A. Mani wrote:

>
> Well, you are saying the FOSS world should operate differently and
> that you write things that you may not be believing in.
> Did anybody object to that write-up?

I had mentioned in my last email that the text was intended as a 
placeholder, a slightly better alternative to Lorem Ipsum. I brought up 
the issue since cited the text on the frontpage of the website as an 
instance of the group's mission and goals.

Since I did not know about the exact missions of this group, I believed 
in it just like I believe in the Lorem Ipsum. I had asked the text to be 
reformatted by others. However, even considering the scope of that 
write-up, I did not find any encouraging factor in the discussions 
regarding mailing list rules so far.


>
> People take time to assimilate ideas.
> Be patient.
>

I was eagerly trying to explain the same point to you :-)

>
> I have relatively 'radical' views?
> Some others have backward views is a better formulation.

Radical in terms of treating newcomers to FOSS who need more 
encouragement and less poke-in-the-eye, if you follow what I mean. Your 
approach may be suitable at a later stage when this group has matured 
enough, that is, if and when the group achieves its present target of 
introducing women and moves on to supporting women who are pretty 
comfortable with FOSS tools to enhance their skills.

>
> wfs-india appears to be a somewhat human group. At least that is what
> our website suggests.
> Our mailing lists involve debates.
> Often, I admit others are not able to reason about the points I raise.
> We need more qualified feminists in our group.

I am definitely not the qualified person in that case. I fail to see the 
reason behind your present approach. I do support your views partly, but 
I don't support your approach.

>
> Some like IDG are dogmatic about how things should happen and are
> quite intemperate.

The terms of dogmatism is very subjective.

>
> 'Radical views' do not hinder newbie interaction, but intemperate behavior can.
>
> Where is this "feudal style stringent rules " coming from? ... I never
> imposed any.

I did not find you ever accepting others views about keeping the 
guidelines simple, or even using polite language on the website. You did 
not stop putting up contradictory statements on the website without 
consulting others. Any such statement on the website makes it the 
statement of the group.

> The original mailing list rules is pretty standard.
> We have improved it for our purposes.

Many here have raised their doubts about whether that standard set of 
rules are needed at all.

>
> Be happy.
>

Let's be happy together.


>
> For all the concerns that you have raised, the solution is simple.
> We proceed in a modular way with few committed people handling the
> respective module.

Your argument follows the analogy:

Governing a country is a tough job.
There are not many qualified persons who can govern a country.
Therefore, the task of governing a country should be restricted in the 
hands of a few people.

Read: we they are called anarchists.

> How many words did I offer for the Git workshop?
>

It was your choice not to. If you remember, I had asked suggestions from 
everybody. Otherwise I would've been handled it alone, which obviously I 
did not.


Hope I am able to solve your doubts partially.

Cheers.

-- 
Kaustav Das Modak
Desinated Partner
CodeBinders Web Development Services LLP

Web: http://www.codebinders.com
Blog: http://kaustav.codebinders.com
Ph: (+91) 9874456551