[ciphershed] Re: Mumble voice chat with Jos at 3PM EST
- From: "Alain Forget" <aforget@xxxxxxx>
- To: <ciphershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 13:42:23 -0400
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ciphershed-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ciphershed-
>bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pid Zero
>Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 13:31
>To: ciphershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [ciphershed] Re: Mumble voice chat with Jos at 3PM EST
>
>Nobody is going to compell you install a voice chat app if you have issues with
>it. But that doesn't exclude others from using them. It'll always be a game of
>catch up (with some missing the prime opportunity to chime in) on the basis
>that thanks to the 24hr nature of the project, there's always discussion
>happening.
>
>Even when the PMC is created. There's not going to be a situation in which
>only the people awake during the time when an issue is being discussed get to
>make a binding decision. The fact that none of those on the PMC-elect live in
>the same timeline prohibits it. So I wouldn't worry about being left behind.
>
>The mailing list is great for having wider discussions with the whole
>community. But it's not a great place for back & forth dialogue. At least not
>efficiently. As for transparency, the PMC is the only body capable of making
>project oriented decisions and it's discussions will be publicly available by
>design.
>
><Replied from my mobile so please excuse the fat fingering & lack of PGP. I
>advise that any technical info in this email be subject to external scrutiny>
>--
>At the time of writing, no warrants have been served to me, nor am I
>under any legal compulsion concerning the CipherShed project. I do not
>know of any searches of seizures of my assets.
>
>On Tuesday, June 24, 2014, Stephen R Guglielmo <srguglielmo@xxxxxxxxx>
>wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Bill Cox <waywardgeek@xxxxxxxxx
><javascript:;> > wrote:
> > Hi. Jos would like to have a Mumble chat with any of us who are
>interested,
> > and is trying to decide when.
>
> I do want to politely voice my opposition to using these "voice chats"
> (Skype, Mumble, TeamSpeak) as a means of communication.
>
> I have a few personal issues with it, as well as issues for the
> project overall. My personal issues are just that, personal, so
> they're not too important. My busy schedule requires me to check my
> email at work or elsewhere quite often and voice chats would not be
> possible in those cases. I also do not own a microphone or webcam
>and
> have no interest in spending the money to purchase one.
>
> Some other issues I have that aren't so personal are the lack of
> logging and transparency in voice chats. We invite people to join us,
> yet we use methods which force them to install more software. There
>is
> no public logging/archive of voice chats either. Yes, they can be
> recorded and posted as an mp3 somewhere, but that is still not very
> practical. If a large decision is made during a voice call that
> someone missed, they can be very "out of the loop" and rather
> frustrated. I feel as though voice calls quickly eliminates the
> participation of a majority people who want to be involved (even if
> just observing). It involves software, often proprietary, to be
> installed on everyone's systems. It's yet another thing to setup. I
> already have 4 different passwords related directly to CipherShed
>(WP,
> forum, wiki, and GitHub). The number of "dependencies" just to stay
> involved is increasing.
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>--
>At the time of writing, no warrants have ever been served to me, nor am I
>under any personal legal compulsion concerning the
>CipherShed project. I do not know of any searches or seizures of my
>assets.
I really think being ready by Saturday is really just not possible, between the
72-hour rule and the number of important action items the PMC need to deal with
just to get organised, including:
* private (?) mailing list
* voting mechanism
* decide on the PMC chair policy
* come to a clear/formal/explicit consensus on CipherShed's and the PMC's
mandate
* clearly/explicitly define the QA team's role
* elect QA team members
* figure out what needs to be prepped/organised for the influx of contributors
we're soon to have
* other stuff I/we haven't thought of, lost track of, or that we'll discover
along the way
I'd love to hit the ground running and make super-fast progress, but there's
just no way I see all this getting done by Saturday, unless the PMC can somehow
have an über productive synchronised (e.g., Mumble/TeamSpeak) meeting.
On the note of voice chat meetings, I agree with Stephen that they should be
avoided whenever possible, for the purposes of inclusion and transparency.
However, when there are a long list of items that we want to discuss, address,
and (hopefully) resolve in a short period of time, they can be a lot faster and
efficient than going back and forth over e-mail. However, that speed and
efficiency comes at the cost of some transparency and a risk of leaving other
out who couldn't make the call. It's a trade-off that I don't have a good
answer for.
If the call with Jos is going to go-ahead, my schedule is relatively flexible,
so it's probably easier if you/others suggest times, and if one doesn't work
for me, I'll let you know. I'm fine with almost all of the times Jos suggested.
Alain
Other related posts:
