W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > January 2012

Re: shame on losing good folks (or failing others who cannot take the pace)

From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 17:53:25 +0100
Cc: Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com>, "public-xg-webid@w3.org" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
Message-Id: <8469AD8B-1321-40E8-8035-899E89058310@bblfish.net>
To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>

On 12 Jan 2012, at 17:39, Melvin Carvalho wrote:

> On 12 January 2012 17:28, Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com> wrote:
>> Its sad to lose Mo. Its also sad to see others unable to participate,
>> publicly (given the tone).
>> But, its a rough and tumble game, crypto. Its an edgy topic. If you are
>> (undeclared) proxy for certain government agencies with fixed positions
>> about social needs, its hard to even associate with the likes of me (for
>> example).
>> Why I like the tone, here, and even the topics that folks discuss, is
>> because it and they are identical to the history of certs. And, certs came
>> out just fine (against all the odds). So too will this group.
>> Putting SSL javascript libs for the ssl client on the RDFa page built
>> dyanmically with a sparql query, that then configures said clients SSL
>> server trust points is just magical.
>> And its such magic that changes the game.
> I once proposed the following code of conduct for WebID
> http://lists.foaf-project.org/pipermail/foaf-protocols/2010-October/004057.html
> If there's one thing I've learnt over the last few years, it's that
> the Web is about tolerance.
> IMHO it's the measure of your magnitude as a person, group or
> ecosystem, what and how much you can tolerate, and channel towards
> positive ends.
> I have noticed that discussions at time have got heated, but that's a
> good sign, it shows people are passionate about the technology.  I
> hope as we transitions to the more informal CG that people can make an
> effort to be more inclusive, courteous and thoughtful. :)

yes. I was about to post it on the wiki, but then I was wondering if something
a bit more practical would be useful, as for example trying to be careful to 
write clearly and be relevant because it takes time to read mail, try to take
time to read responses, aim for conciseness....

I am sure there must be something on the W3C on this already. And of course I should
have read it....



Social Web Architect
Received on Thursday, 12 January 2012 17:20:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:06:29 UTC