Recent discussion about discussions

[Justin Whear]

On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 18:12:16 +0000, bossfong wrote:

> On Wednesday, 12 March 2014 at 18:20:05 UTC, Justin Whear wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 18:11:50 +0000, bossfong wrote:
>>
>>> ...
>>> I even belive it's counter-productive when comparing the discussion
>>> flow with modern forum software.
>>> ...
>>
>> I think most of us use email or newsreader software to participate,
>> while the forum frontend caters primarily to the more casual users.
> 
> I understand that. But since the newsgroup seems to me to be the only
> way to stay up-to-date with D's development, I think it should be more
> open to casual developers.
> I mean, there seem to be so many saying, there are too little people
> willing to do the work, we must start opening up for new developers to
> join in. They won't just magically start developing. Being able to take
> part in duscussions is essential for that.
> (And I unerstand everyone is technically able to take part in the
> discussions, but for someone who is not used to mailing lists it is
> quite a burden getting used to it, at least thats my
> feeling/experience).

Regarding barrier to entry: because newsgroups have been around so long, 
there are many polished readers available for every platform.  I consider 
myself a newsgroup newb, so I use Pan on Linux--it's dead simple.  The 
minimal effort of installing and using a reader might turn away the most 
casual of posters, but shouldn't be a deterrent to anyone who is serious 
about participating.  Heck, we get the occasional troll, so it can't be 
too hard.

> 
>> I'm curious why you think that mailing-lists are a counterproductive
>> way of handling this type of discussion,
> 
> This shows a probblem that annoys me a lot. I never said that, you just
> cut out the "when comparing to..." part and that twists the meaning of
> what I said. That's (to me) a no-go.
> 

Right, you said "when comparing the discussion flow with modern 
forum software."  But discussion flow is what the newsgroup approach does 
really *well*, having had threading and quoting support that modern 
forums are just starting to get serious about.  So I'm looking for you to 
unpack this assertion with examples of where forum software excels 
newsgroups in managing discussion flow.

>> particularly when much of the OSS developed in the last twenty years
>> has been managed and coordinated using mailing-lists.
> 
> Only because things have been a particular way for years or even
> decades, doesn't mean there might be better alternatives. Technology
> evolves and the people creating it should too.

I'm not adverse to change, but I am against change for change's sake.  
Why should we discard this wonderfully simple, flexible, powerful, and 
distributed solution?  In exchange for what?

Cheers,
Justin