Difference between revisions of "Talk:Code of conduct"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Undiscussed changes: Understood)
(Common sense: Not convinced)
Line 19: Line 19:
 
== Common sense ==
 
== Common sense ==
 
I don't understand the first point, what would you think of "If you choose to use the Archlinux distribution, you are welcome and you are encouraged to adhere to Arch Linux principles." ? -- [[User:Kewl|Kewl]] ([[User talk:Kewl|talk]]) 19:26, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 
I don't understand the first point, what would you think of "If you choose to use the Archlinux distribution, you are welcome and you are encouraged to adhere to Arch Linux principles." ? -- [[User:Kewl|Kewl]] ([[User talk:Kewl|talk]]) 19:26, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 +
 +
: My preference is for "embrace" - which has a positive connotation, as opposed to "adhere" which is ''slightly'' less so. [[User:Jasonwryan|Jasonwryan]] ([[User talk:Jasonwryan|talk]]) 23:30, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  
 
== Undiscussed changes ==
 
== Undiscussed changes ==

Revision as of 23:30, 10 November 2018

Maybe make the section "correct" more clear

I'd like to see a clearer title for that section and add a little more on how users should effectively ask for help and report issues. ie they need to state the whole problem and what they have already tried as well as logs and error messages. how to report and ask smart questions are both great links.

Maybe "don't ask to ask" could also be added, as in, "can someone help me? My Arch install is broken!" type of messages.Meskarune (talk) 01:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't think the ask smart questions is such a great link to give people. It's good for understanding our culture but it's not good for smooth relations with people asking questions. However, I do think how to report should be added; it's concise and to the point without risking antagonizing the person with a question. MacGyver (talk) 14:00, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, maybe https://askubuntu.com/help/how-to-ask would be a better link to use. It is shorter, nicer and clearer than ESR's doc. Meskarune (talk) 03:26, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure I agree re. ESR. It is an exemplary exposition of the critical thinking required to effectively engage with a technical audience. I have no issues with people finding it difficult; this isn't a distro like Ubuntu where popularity is a consideration. Our focus is on contribution, so a degree of proficiency, or the desire to attain proficiency, is a prerequisite. Reading Smart Questions is a pretty good gauge of that willingness. Jasonwryan (talk) 06:58, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Change category

To Category:Arch community. --Larivact (talk) 18:22, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

[1] -- Alad (talk) 22:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Common sense

I don't understand the first point, what would you think of "If you choose to use the Archlinux distribution, you are welcome and you are encouraged to adhere to Arch Linux principles." ? -- Kewl (talk) 19:26, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

My preference is for "embrace" - which has a positive connotation, as opposed to "adhere" which is slightly less so. Jasonwryan (talk) 23:30, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Undiscussed changes

I was appalled that once again, maintainers made unwarranted changes to cosysop pages they have no place in editing. Neither User:Kewl or User:Svito are staff (in particular, neither forum or IRC mods), yet made the following changes in meaning:

  • advice on computer product recommendations to advice on computer products in general. Anything classifies as a general computer product, including Arch itself. Hence the added recommendations.
  • actively discouraged was changed to strongly discouraged. "strongly" is vague, actively implies administrative action, which is indeed the action taken on spam.

The page has been reverted to [2]. In line with User_talk:Larivact#DeveloperWiki, I've revoked the cosysop right for both maintainers during the period of 2 weeks from now on. Should any of you pull this kind of stuff again, it won't be pretty. -- Alad (talk) 22:03, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks? My changes were only inserting spaces that do not change how page is rendered at all and using available wikilinks inside sections instead of using section headers. I even started my own draft page so if I would plan to any actual string changes I would make it to draft not real thing. -- Svito (talk) 22:17, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, with the sudden 15 changes to the article I didn't inspect the authors closely enough. Reverted your cosysop removal. -- Alad (talk) 22:21, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
I unintentionally changed the meaning and understand the demotion, this will not happen again. Apologies to User:Svito for involving you, unintentionally as well, into this. -- Kewl (talk) 23:02, 10 November 2018 (UTC)