On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 1:24 PM James Lu wrote:

One of the reasons Guido left was the insane volume of emails he had to read on Python-ideas.

You'd have to ask Guido directly, but I don't think so. It wasn't the volume, but the nature and timing of the discussion that was so difficult. It went on for a LONG time, with many, many circular arguments, and people commenting on issues that has already been brought up and maybe resolved. Then the kicker -- after a decision was made, there were very strong objections -- the whole process was rather ugly. One can certainly make a good case that a different system for having such discussion might have made it much better -- but I'm not so sure. But maybe it's a good case-study t guide a decision. Frankly, I'm more concerned about how an important technical discussion like that goes than I am about than issues like the recent "beautiful - ugly" thread. Maybe we need something in-between python-idea and python-dev -- a place to discuss "serious" proposals, where "serious" means somewhat fleshed out, and with the support of at least a couple key people. One of the problems with the assignment expression discussion is that it got pretty far on python-ideas, then moved to python-dev, where is was further discussed (and there were parallel thread on the two lists) -- but the two list have overlapping, but different members, so some folks were surprised at the outcome. -CHB -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception Chris.Barker@noaa.gov

One of the reasons Guido left was the insane volume of emails he had to read on Python-ideas.

...

A tiny bit of discussion is still better than none at all. And even if there's no discussion, there's a name attached to the message, which makes it more personal and meaningful than a "+1" counter getting incremented somewhere.

Counting only makes sense if the counts are going to be treated as votes, and we don't do that. I agree. I think this is good evidence in favor of using GitHub pull requests or GitHub issues- you can see exactly who +1’d a topic.

GitHub also has moderation tools and the ability to delete comments that are irrelevant, and edit comments that are disrespectful.

...

I hope that, if any such change is made, a forum system is chosen that allows full participation via either email or news. Otherwise it will probably mean the end of my participation, because I don't have time to chase down and wrestle with multiple web forums every day. +1, everyone should be accommodated. I believe GitHub has direct email capability. If you watch the repository and have email notifications on, you can reply directly to an email and it will be sent as a reply.

— To solve the problem of tons of email for controversial decisions like :=, I don’t think GitHub issues would actually be the solution. The best solution would to have admins receive all the email, and broadcast a subset of the email sent, only broadcasting new arguments and new opinions.

Admins can do this “summary duty” every 12 hours on a rotating basis, where each admin takes turns doing summary duty.

This solution would mean a slower iteration time for the conversation, but it would significantly lessen the deluge of email, and I think that would make it more bearable for people participating in the conversation. After all, once a proposal has been fleshed out, what kind of conversation needs more than say 30 rounds of constructive discussion- in that case, if people reply every 25 hours, the discussion would be done in a month.

For transparency purposes, all of the email can be made received for approval can be published online. Actually, since this is a Mailman list, all that needs to happen is to turn on moderation. Every message is held in the moderation queue till handled. If any of the people in charge think it is a useful message,

On 9/20/18 9:45 PM, James Lu wrote: they release it to the list. If any of the people in charge think it is a bad message, they can reject it (first to act wins). Probably need someone to periodically review the messages that have sit for a bit and make a decision on them. Some trusted people can have their moderation status removed, and what they post goes to the list immediately, and if they abuse that right, it can be taken back. -- Richard Damon