Reasons for hall monitoring

[Henrique Junior]

2010/5/6 Orcan Ogetbil <oget.fedora at gmail.com>
>
> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Karel Zak wrote:
> > On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 05:46:21PM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 23:22 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> >> > Dne 6.5.2010 12:28, Karel Zak napsal(a):
> >> > >> Thank you for pointing out yet another undemocratic policy passed by one of
> >> > >
> >> > > +1  The Hall Monitor Policy is cancer.
> >> >
> >> > +1000 it feels to me like in a bad old Communism when the open debate
> >> > was allowed only when it didn't touch the leading role of the Communist
> >> > Party. I really don't think anybody in this thread said anything so
> >> > sacrilegious that the thread should be terminated.
> >>
> >> Normally, I'd be against it killing a thread, but the thread that
> >> started this discussion had already been done awhile back and this new
> >> thread added *nothing* new to the discussion. Frankly, it was more
> >
> > This all is your subjective opinion. There is not objective and
> > unbiased way how evaluate any discussion, it's unmeasurable.
>
> I don't agree. There are logical ways to measure this. e.g.
>
> N people participate in a thread.
> -> (N/2)+1 of them complains to the moderator
> -> the thread gets closed.
>
> But since the number of complaints in this case was 3 only, closing
> the thread did not make any sense.

I believe that these long discussions will end only when there is a
better way of communication (and interaction) between the various
contributors of the Fedora Project, Fedora Board and FESCO. Anything
that diminishes that sense of "we decide, you do."

--
Henrique "LonelySpooky" Junior