I use a notebook and a pen, so rss-capable-feed-knurling isn't going to get entries on my calendar.<br><br>And I don't think that anybody will be trying to track all the events that are going to use all the resources: I think that if you watch -discuss, and you see someone post something that conflicts with something you were planning, you should go, 'hey, i was already planning something then!' and then see if you can work it out.<br>
<br>--S<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Kelly <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hurtstotouchfire@gmail.com">hurtstotouchfire@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">> I'm way in favor of just<br>
> assuming people can manage to work it out when conflict arises, rather than<br>
> trying to work out some system to eliminate conflict.<br>
<br>
</div>I think there will still be a considerable amount of working out<br>
conflicts, don't worry. I'm not clear what you're suggesting here<br>
though. Do you oppose having a sweet calendar that one of our<br>
bright-eyed and bushy-tailed newbs has taken it upon himself to build?<br>
Or do you just want us to stop arguing on discuss? Cause man I'm SO<br>
THERE.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
> It seems like the natural way to handle this is to just have people post to<br>
> -discuss with an even announcement, to include whichever room or resource<br>
> they plan to be using, and let everyone use the calendaring/tracking<br>
> solution of their choice.<br>
<br>
</div>Oh god, imagining all of that parallel data-entry is breaking my<br>
heart. Have you heard about the feed features our new cal will have?<br>
Everyone CAN use the calendering/tracking solution of their choice.<br>
Cause our data will be all standardized and shit.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
-K<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Shannon Lee <<a href="mailto:shannon@scatter.com">shannon@scatter.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> This sounds like everything worked out fine. I'm way in favor of just<br>
> assuming people can manage to work it out when conflict arises, rather than<br>
> trying to work out some system to eliminate conflict.<br>
><br>
> It seems like the natural way to handle this is to just have people post to<br>
> -discuss with an even announcement, to include whichever room or resource<br>
> they plan to be using, and let everyone use the calendaring/tracking<br>
> solution of their choice.<br>
><br>
> --S<br>
><br>
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Kelly <<a href="mailto:hurtstotouchfire@gmail.com">hurtstotouchfire@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> I don't think contact info is the key to solving<br>
>> space-scheduling-conflict. The recent classroom conflict that we had<br>
>> was actually caused by not having a centralized, well-organized<br>
>> listing for events. The event which created the overlap was scheduled<br>
>> by a new member who didn't know the protocol for hosting events in the<br>
>> space and decided to just dive in, which I can respect. I actually<br>
>> emailed her after she posted about her event, and sent her the FAQ,<br>
>> encouraging her to stay involved and be excellent. And somehow<br>
>> between the two of us we STILL didn't notice the overlap.<br>
>><br>
>> Anyway, the end result was that the Linux group was meeting in the<br>
>> room she intended to use, so she used the church classroom, and that<br>
>> left BayCat out on the couches. I think it worked out ok, but I think<br>
>> this sort of thing is going to keep happening unless we have a single,<br>
>> easy to use system that's open to everyone. I think that the required<br>
>> login & permissions was actually the reason you hadn't put the Linux<br>
>> group on the google cal, right Jim?<br>
>><br>
>> It seems like at this point, the debate has boiled down to requiring<br>
>> contact information for events. It seems there's significant<br>
>> opposition to that (and I'm on that team as well) so I expect we'll go<br>
>> with the standard consensus practice of keeping the status quo (no<br>
>> contact info required). I think that good faith and reasonable<br>
>> attempts at excellence should suffice beyond that.<br>
>><br>
>> So, er, basically I agree with Vlad. All we need is the One True Calendar.<br>
>><br>
>> -K<br>
>><br>
>> On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Vlad Spears <<a href="mailto:spears@2secondfuse.com">spears@2secondfuse.com</a>><br>
>> wrote:<br>
>> > I'm not sure how contact info plays into resolving conflicts over<br>
>> > classroom or other resource use. Isn't the purpose of NoiseCal to<br>
>> > mark out use of a resource for periods of time in a single, accepted<br>
>> > system? If we have One True Calendar which is the only place to<br>
>> > reserve classrooms, conflicts become much less likely. I don't see<br>
>> > how contact info is a part of conflict resolution if a resource can't<br>
>> > be double-booked.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > I tend to mark everything I do with my name, so my resistance to this<br>
>> > idea isn't something personal. So far, though, I haven't heard a<br>
>> > compelling argument for *requiring* identifiers or contact info of any<br>
>> > kind on NoiseCal.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Vlad<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > On Jan 24, 2010, at 4:12 PM, jim wrote:<br>
>> ><br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> >> this seems a dramatic response.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> a problem did arise: conflict over use of a classroom.<br>
>> >> the way the discussion has resolved seems to be a<br>
>> >> general approach to promoting that a contact point should<br>
>> >> be included, no matter the form of the contact info.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> i request that, before you excitedly add to an email<br>
>> >> thread, you read the thread as far as it goes, and if you<br>
>> >> reply, please assume good will on the part of the<br>
>> >> participants and try to constrain the emotional content<br>
>> >> of your contribution, at least at first.<br>
>> >> of course, if others seem to pummel you with emotions,<br>
>> >> it seems good to me that you pull out your guns and fire<br>
>> >> back.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> >> On Sun, 2010-01-24 at 15:17 -0800, Christie Dudley wrote:<br>
>> >>> So what you're saying is anyone who wants to lock in a room needs to<br>
>> >>> post their email addresses on the web? You do realize the<br>
>> >>> implications<br>
>> >>> of this, right?<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> There is a lot of "solving problems that don't exist" going on here.<br>
>> >>> If people hold events, they usually do some kind of promotion as<br>
>> >>> well. If there are events that show up on the calendar that nobody<br>
>> >>> has any idea what they are, whether there's an email address<br>
>> >>> associated or not, that are potentially blocking other events are<br>
>> >>> probably going to be targeted to get bumped.<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> This should go without saying to those of us who even give a passing<br>
>> >>> glance at the mailing list and/or show up to the occasional meeting.<br>
>> >>> I'd even be willing to bet all those that don't would have to do is<br>
>> >>> ask someone who's more active. (Which they generally do anyway.)<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> This is clearly a problem that's already been solved.<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> Christie<br>
>> >>> _______<br>
>> >>> Getting to the bottom of the hill is convenient. The view from the<br>
>> >>> top<br>
>> >>> of the hill is stunning. Where would you choose to live?<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 11:14 AM, davidfine <<a href="mailto:d@vidfine.com">d@vidfine.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> >>> I'm cool with that definition. The practical upshot is, if we<br>
>> >>> get consensus, that events listed without a contact email<br>
>> >>> address are not immune from being displaced by other events.<br>
>> >>> --D<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> On Sun 24/01/10 9:49 AM , "jim" <a href="mailto:jim@well.com">jim@well.com</a> sent:<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> "significant resources" for now could be defined as<br>
>> >>> reserved use of some area in the space and also use<br>
>> >>> of electrical power.<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> "contact information" for now could be defined as<br>
>> >>> an email address.<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> definitions could be changed as part of the self-<br>
>> >>> adjusting mechanism of responding to frustrations<br>
>> >>> as we discover them.<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> On Sun, 2010-01-24 at 09:30 -0800, davidfine wrote:<br>
>> >>>> I'd rather stay open to pranks and malice than<br>
>> >>> implement something<br>
>> >>>> counter to our values. It's not like a plane will<br>
>> >>> explode if we don't<br>
>> >>>> IR scan everyone who edits our wiki. But as you<br>
>> >>> said, we have a right<br>
>> >>>> to insist that a person reserving "significant<br>
>> >>> resources" leave some<br>
>> >>>> contact info. All that remains is to define<br>
>> >>> "significant resources"<br>
>> >>>> and "contact information".<br>
>> >>>> --D<br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> On Sun 24/01/10 8:48 AM , "jim" <a href="mailto:jim@well.com">jim@well.com</a> sent:<br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> i think your note below is right on. to claim<br>
>> >>>> resources, all that's needed for sure is some<br>
>> >>>> means of communication with the prospective<br>
>> >>> claimer.<br>
>> >>>> i don't see a need for validating the actual<br>
>> >>>> identity of the claimer.<br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> i like the idea that claims on resources would<br>
>> >>>> involve a member (not to say non-members should<br>
>> >>>> not be able to use resources ad hoc, and<br>
>> >>> "resources"<br>
>> >>>> to me means things that are significant, such as<br>
>> >>>> classroom space, electrical power costs, quality<br>
>> >>>> of air, use of community effort...).<br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> On Sat, 2010-01-23 at 23:00 -0800, Ian Atha wrote:<br>
>> >>>>> We could have an optional organiser field for each<br>
>> >>> event<br>
>> >>>> created.<br>
>> >>>>> During a meeting two weeks ago, someone mentioned<br>
>> >>> that "it's<br>
>> >>>> nice to<br>
>> >>>>> have events sponsored by a member". Anything other<br>
>> >>> than that<br>
>> >>>> is<br>
>> >>>>> impossible, or we would be fooling ourselves,<br>
>> >>> given our<br>
>> >>>> current<br>
>> >>>>> infrastructure.<br>
>> >>>>><br>
>> >>>>> That's to say, I have no clue who "Ever Falling"<br>
>> >>> is, if they<br>
>> >>>> are a<br>
>> >>>>> member, or if they are to be trusted. I have no<br>
>> >>> way of<br>
>> >>>> actually<br>
>> >>>>> associating that guy who introduced himself as<br>
>> >>> "Leif" to me<br>
>> >>>> with<br>
>> >>>>> "<a href="mailto:leif@synthesize.us">leif@synthesize.us</a>", other than good faith. I<br>
>> >>> have no<br>
>> >>>> problem<br>
>> >>>>> extending that good faith to people editing the<br>
>> >>> wiki putting<br>
>> >>>> a "name"<br>
>> >>>>> (or a moniker, or whatever).<br>
>> >>>>><br>
>> >>>>> If someone really wants authentication and<br>
>> >>> authorization for<br>
>> >>>> reserving<br>
>> >>>>> resources, I would really like to hear a<br>
>> >>> full-fledged<br>
>> >>>> proposal. How do<br>
>> >>>>> we associate monikers with faces? How do we<br>
>> >>> associate<br>
>> >>>> monikers with<br>
>> >>>>> usernames? Who validates that? Who says "thatha"<br>
>> >>> is a<br>
>> >>>> trusted person,<br>
>> >>>>> but not "anonymous_user_1234"?<br>
>> >>>>><br>
>> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 20:59, jim <<a href="mailto:jim@well.com">jim@well.com</a>><br>
>> >>> wrote:<br>
>> >>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>> makes sense.<br>
>> >>>>>> i wasn't worried about spam-like robots, mainly<br>
>> >>>>>> some way to manage contention for resources,<br>
>> >>> also<br>
>> >>>>>> to minimize pranks and malice.<br>
>> >>>>>> non-logged in edits seem fine, but people so<br>
>> >>>>>> doing and who want to claim a resource should<br>
>> >>>>>> identify themselves somehow or another, it seems<br>
>> >>>>>> to me.<br>
>> >>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>> On Sat, 2010-01-23 at 18:35 -0800, Leif Ryge<br>
>> >>> wrote:<br>
>> >>>>>>> So-called "anonymous" edits on mediawiki are<br>
>> >>> really a<br>
>> >>>> misnomer - it is more accurate to describe them as<br>
>> >>>> non-logged-in edits, since they are actually<br>
>> >>> attributed to an<br>
>> >>>> IP address which is potentially much less anonymous<br>
>> >>> than<br>
>> >>>> logging in with a pseudonym.<br>
>> >>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>> The reason to allow them is convenience and the<br>
>> >>> increased<br>
>> >>>> participationn that results from that. People are<br>
>> >>> much more<br>
>> >>>> likely to edit the wiki if there are no barriers to<br>
>> >>> doing so,<br>
>> >>>> and the small hassle of picking a name and password<br>
>> >>> is a<br>
>> >>>> significant barrier. On the other hand, requiring<br>
>> >>> login to<br>
>> >>>> edit achieves absolutely nothing, unless you also<br>
>> >>> restrict<br>
>> >>>> account creation (which would obviously be a much<br>
>> >>> bigger<br>
>> >>>> barrier and reduce the use(fulness) of the wiki).<br>
>> >>> I'm an admin<br>
>> >>>> on a couple of wikis which do require a login to<br>
>> >>> edit, and let<br>
>> >>>> me tell you: spam robots figured out how to create<br>
>> >>> mediawiki<br>
>> >>>> accounts a *long* time ago.<br>
>> >>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>> So, I think we should continue to allow<br>
>> >>> non-logged-in<br>
>> >>>> edits on the wiki, and by extension the calendar, so<br>
>> >>> that<br>
>> >>>> forgetting one's password (or not wanting to create<br>
>> >>> yet<br>
>> >>>> another) is no excuse for not putting something on<br>
>> >>> it.<br>
>> >>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>> ~leif<br>
>> >>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>> p.s.: notes from Ian and me meeting today are<br>
>> >>> at<br>
>> >>>> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/NoiseCal" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/NoiseCal</a><br>
>> >>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>> ----- Original message -----<br>
>> >>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>>> oh, i don't get why anonymous edits:<br>
>> >>>>>>>> anonymity seems antithetical to<br>
>> >>> accountabilty, and<br>
>> >>>>>>>> it seems to me things that our community<br>
>> >>> depends on<br>
>> >>>>>>>> ought to have some accountability track:<br>
>> >>> who's claiming<br>
>> >>>>>>>> what resources and why. requiring a name also<br>
>> >>> reduces<br>
>> >>>>>>>> the vulnerability to malice and pranks.<br>
>> >>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>>> On Sat, 2010-01-23 at 13:36 -0800, Ian Atha<br>
>> >>> wrote:<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> Hey folks,<br>
>> >>>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>>>> Leif and I are meeting up at 2169 today<br>
>> >>> circa 3pm to<br>
>> >>>> brainstorm about<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> the implementation of the One True<br>
>> >>> Noisebridge<br>
>> >>>> Calendar. If you have<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> anything you'd like us to consider now's<br>
>> >>> the time to<br>
>> >>>> speak!<br>
>> >>>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>>>> For your reference, voilá Kelly's specs:<br>
>> >>>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - Publicly editable, anonymously editable<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - Publicly linkable<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - Has the usual variety of calendar layouts<br>
>> >>> (day,<br>
>> >>>> week, month, list)<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - The usual calendar capabilities<br>
>> >>> (description field,<br>
>> >>>> repeating events)<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - iCal feed, RSS feed<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - Some sort of feed which can auto-update<br>
>> >>> the wiki<br>
>> >>>> homepage<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - Probably free<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - Hosted locally(ish)<br>
>> >>>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>>>> And bonus options:<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - Can use wiki logins or some other kind of<br>
>> >>>> identification in addition<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> to anonymous<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - Events have a field for which room/area<br>
>> >>> of NB<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - Calendars show which room/area of NB<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - open source or some other moral<br>
>> >>> superiority<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - easy publishing to email (for<br>
>> >>> nb-announce, for<br>
>> >>>> instance)<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> - misc bells and whistles<br>
>> >>>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>>>> I'd heart you so much more if we keep this<br>
>> >>> thread<br>
>> >>>> relevant!<br>
>> >>>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>>>> -ian.<br>
>> >>>>>>>>><br>
>> >>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>>>>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
>> >>>>>>>>> <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
>> >>>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
>> >>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>>><br>
>> >>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >>>>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
>> >>>>>>>> <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
>> >>>>>>>><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
>> >>>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >>>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
>> >>>>>>> <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
>> >>>>>>><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
>> >>>>>><br>
>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
>> >>>>>> <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
>> >>>>>><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
>> >>>>>><br>
>> >>>>><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
>> >>>> <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
>> >>> <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >><br>
>> >> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
>> >> <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
>> >> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> > _______________________________________________<br>
>> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
>> > <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
>> > <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
>> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Shannon Lee<br>
> (503) 539-3700<br>
><br>
> "Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science."<br>
><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Shannon Lee<br>(503) 539-3700<br><br>"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science."<br>