[Noisebridge-discuss] NoisyCalendary

Sun Jan 24 23:17:17 UTC 2010

So what you're saying is anyone who wants to lock in a room needs to post
their email addresses on the web? You do realize the implications of this,
right?

There is a lot of "solving problems that don't exist" going on here.  If
people hold events, they usually do some kind of promotion as well.  If
there are events that show up on the calendar that nobody has any idea what
they are, whether there's an email address associated or not, that are
potentially blocking other events are probably going to be targeted to get
bumped.

This should go without saying to those of us who even give a passing glance
at the mailing list and/or show up to the occasional meeting.  I'd even be
willing to bet all those that don't would have to do is ask someone who's
more active.  (Which they generally do anyway.)

This is clearly a problem that's already been solved.

Christie
_______
Getting to the bottom of the hill is convenient. The view from the top of
the hill is stunning. Where would you choose to live?

On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 11:14 AM, davidfine <d at vidfine.com> wrote:

> I'm cool with that definition. The practical upshot is, if we get
> consensus, that events listed without a contact email address are not immune
> from being displaced by other events.
> --D
>
>
> On Sun 24/01/10 9:49 AM , "jim" jim at well.com sent:
>
>
>
> "significant resources" for now could be defined as
> reserved use of some area in the space and also use
> of electrical power.
>
> "contact information" for now could be defined as
> an email address.
>
> definitions could be changed as part of the self-
> adjusting mechanism of responding to frustrations
> as we discover them.
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 2010-01-24 at 09:30 -0800, davidfine wrote:
> > I'd rather stay open to pranks and malice than implement something
> > counter to our values. It's not like a plane will explode if we don't
> > IR scan everyone who edits our wiki. But as you said, we have a right
> > to insist that a person reserving "significant resources" leave some
> > contact info. All that remains is to define "significant resources"
> > and "contact information".
> > --D
> >
> >
> > On Sun 24/01/10 8:48 AM , "jim" jim at well.com sent:
> >
> >
> > i think your note below is right on. to claim
> > resources, all that's needed for sure is some
> > means of communication with the prospective claimer.
> > i don't see a need for validating the actual
> > identity of the claimer.
> >
> > i like the idea that claims on resources would
> > involve a member (not to say non-members should
> > not be able to use resources ad hoc, and "resources"
> > to me means things that are significant, such as
> > classroom space, electrical power costs, quality
> > of air, use of community effort...).
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 2010-01-23 at 23:00 -0800, Ian Atha wrote:
> > > We could have an optional organiser field for each event
> > created.
> > > During a meeting two weeks ago, someone mentioned that "it's
> > nice to
> > > have events sponsored by a member". Anything other than that
> > is
> > > impossible, or we would be fooling ourselves, given our
> > current
> > > infrastructure.
> > >
> > > That's to say, I have no clue who "Ever Falling" is, if they
> > are a
> > > member, or if they are to be trusted. I have no way of
> > actually
> > > associating that guy who introduced himself as "Leif" to me
> > with
> > > "leif at synthesize.us", other than good faith. I have no
> > problem
> > > extending that good faith to people editing the wiki putting
> > a "name"
> > > (or a moniker, or whatever).
> > >
> > > If someone really wants authentication and authorization for
> > reserving
> > > resources, I would really like to hear a full-fledged
> > proposal. How do
> > > we associate monikers with faces? How do we associate
> > monikers with
> > > usernames? Who validates that? Who says "thatha" is a
> > trusted person,
> > > but not "anonymous_user_1234"?
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 20:59, jim <jim at well.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > makes sense.
> > > > i wasn't worried about spam-like robots, mainly
> > > > some way to manage contention for resources, also
> > > > to minimize pranks and malice.
> > > > non-logged in edits seem fine, but people so
> > > > doing and who want to claim a resource should
> > > > identify themselves somehow or another, it seems
> > > > to me.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 2010-01-23 at 18:35 -0800, Leif Ryge wrote:
> > > >> So-called "anonymous" edits on mediawiki are really a
> > misnomer - it is more accurate to describe them as
> > non-logged-in edits, since they are actually attributed to an
> > IP address which is potentially much less anonymous than
> > logging in with a pseudonym.
> > > >>
> > > >> The reason to allow them is convenience and the increased
> > participationn that results from that. People are much more
> > likely to edit the wiki if there are no barriers to doing so,
> > and the small hassle of picking a name and password is a
> > significant barrier. On the other hand, requiring login to
> > edit achieves absolutely nothing, unless you also restrict
> > account creation (which would obviously be a much bigger
> > barrier and reduce the use(fulness) of the wiki). I'm an admin
> > on a couple of wikis which do require a login to edit, and let
> > me tell you: spam robots figured out how to create mediawiki
> > accounts a *long* time ago.
> > > >>
> > > >> So, I think we should continue to allow non-logged-in
> > edits on the wiki, and by extension the calendar, so that
> > forgetting one's password (or not wanting to create yet
> > another) is no excuse for not putting something on it.
> > > >>
> > > >> ~leif
> > > >>
> > > >> p.s.: notes from Ian and me meeting today are at
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/NoiseCal<http://parse.php?redirect=https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/NoiseCal>
> > > >>
> > > >> ----- Original message -----
> > > >> >
> > > >> > oh, i don't get why anonymous edits:
> > > >> > anonymity seems antithetical to accountabilty, and
> > > >> > it seems to me things that our community depends on
> > > >> > ought to have some accountability track: who's claiming
> > > >> > what resources and why. requiring a name also reduces
> > > >> > the vulnerability to malice and pranks.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Sat, 2010-01-23 at 13:36 -0800, Ian Atha wrote:
> > > >> > > Hey folks,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Leif and I are meeting up at 2169 today circa 3pm to
> > brainstorm about
> > > >> > > the implementation of the One True Noisebridge
> > Calendar. If you have
> > > >> > > anything you'd like us to consider now's the time to
> > speak!
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > For your reference, voilá Kelly's specs:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > - Publicly editable, anonymously editable
> > > >> > > - Publicly linkable
> > > >> > > - Has the usual variety of calendar layouts (day,
> > week, month, list)
> > > >> > > - The usual calendar capabilities (description field,
> > repeating events)
> > > >> > > - iCal feed, RSS feed
> > > >> > > - Some sort of feed which can auto-update the wiki
> > homepage
> > > >> > > - Probably free
> > > >> > > - Hosted locally(ish)
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > And bonus options:
> > > >> > > - Can use wiki logins or some other kind of
> > identification in addition
> > > >> > > to anonymous
> > > >> > > - Events have a field for which room/area of NB
> > > >> > > - Calendars show which room/area of NB
> > > >> > > - open source or some other moral superiority
> > > >> > > - easy publishing to email (for nb-announce, for
> > instance)
> > > >> > > - misc bells and whistles
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > I'd heart you so much more if we keep this thread
> > relevant!
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > -ian.
> > > >> > > _______________________________________________
> > > >> > > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > > >> > > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > > >> > >
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss<http://parse.php?redirect=https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss>
> > > >> >
> > > >> > _______________________________________________
> > > >> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > > >> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > > >> >
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss<http://parse.php?redirect=https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss>
> > > >>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > > >> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > > >>
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss<http://parse.php?redirect=https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss>
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > > > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > > >
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss<http://parse.php?redirect=https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss<http://parse.php?redirect=https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20100124/a8846bb8/attachment-0003.html>