Right, our wiki is not a wiki as commonly intended. It’s the OpenMandriva official documentation (I’d agree, it can be improved - like everything).
Also the reason why we did choose Wiki.js engine, after a lot of testing other options.
OTOH we had some bad experiences at the OM inception with “real wiki(s)” which made us not really eager to repeat.
Last but not least, 2 more things worth to add:
We don’t have hundreds or thousands of contributors like the usual_distros_names have, hence the time the few people contributing can spend is less than what we would like.
Second, the refrain: You can’t please everyone and Whatever you do you are wrong.
I think that is important, even if no one agrees with you.
They are mostly identical. The term “hate speech,” is not used in the way it sounds. It is used to make moderation one sided. In the previous quote, you enjoy saying what you think. Society should never be made to believe the same thing, and you cannot make society believe the same thing without enforcement. That enforcement removes your consent, individuality, and uniqueness.
So, the term is a euphemism for, “Speech we do not agree with, and we lack the knowledge or wisdom to prove it. So, we will form a mob to enforce our ideas and words upon you, and you will use them or be removed from society.”
That’s exactly my point. I think if we put all the stuff in Resources into the documentation site and made it easier for people to contribute documentation, it would help redirect repeated efforts made here on the forums, and free up that time for people to work on the distro.
For example, when the 1000th person comes here asking for help because they have Nvidia, they can be directed to the Nvidia article. When the 1001st person comes here saying they borked their machine because they used dnf update, they can be directed to the article on updating. The forum itself could link to the documentation site. People won’t have to explain the same thing again and again on the forums.
I cloned the wiki repo months ago, but never got the wiki.js site running locally to test edits, because life intruded. I’ll, uh, go check their documentation.
I am saying the FAQ as written by Discourse is not compatible with the ToS because it does not respect language boundaries or discussions that may include people disagreeing. That is by design and is how Discourse created it.
Since we do not use the FAQ exclusively as a means to provide people with questions about how to get help, what our categories mean, or how to contact people with functional issues of the forum, then it is also functionally incompatible.
In other communities I would be banned for wrong think and wrong speech just by my disagreement. My point is we need to keep that from happening here. Even if it means people get offended. Disagreement is healthy.
I don’t completely dismiss a person just because I do not agree with them, but I am also not going to waste my time or someone else’s by just softening criticism, or not telling a person they are wrong because their feelings might get hurt. I also don’t look at people’s work as an embodiment of the person. Each must be measured on character and merit.
Yes there were a few instances of ban abuse and censorship already. Hopefully we can all realize that you cannot have software and information freedom, without speech freedom. I have also stood up for those people to have the freedom to speak, even when I did not agree with them on anything.
This poll is meant to bring different viewpoints about our methods of communication, and how to simplify that. I do intend to propose things to the board, because we don’t have enough people that want to use (and help build) OMLx, let alone write documentation.
Why this tread is turning in to discusson about guidelines and online “ways to behave“. Please stop that. If one want some CoC, then have good one; and go suck one dry. I really don’t mind being offended by someone here — we’re all adults, I presume.
I undertood that hate speech as a term may be seen as umbrela term for everything so maby
this
Be civil. Don’t post anything that a reasonable person would consider offensive, abusive, or hate speech.
should become this
Be civil. Don’t post anything that a reasonable person would consider offensive, abusive.
Yet let stay resonable shall we.
Guidelines shood be exactly that, guidelines nothing less nothing more.
Make them stiff and you destroy any community.
People can think my english is bad and be offend by that.
People can think Im a jerk and tell me about it. Even if someone tells me i should fuck my self with a mexican cacti so what? Should we now debating who was offended? The cactus? Mexicans? The Mexican cactus or me? Thats beyound ridiculous?
edit: Thats my general response this is not personal response to @zeroability
That is extraordinarily high. Big topical forums (this is a bit of insider knowledge from a forum with millions of registered users) consider 1% participation to be good, and 2% stellar.
Usage doesn’t translate to productivity. It’s just usage. Most of the posts are in Support but that’s not an indicator, either. There isn’t a good way to measure when a topic leads to a desired result. Some will just mark something as a Solution because it fixes their problem when it could affect more than just one person and require a more permanent fix. To just say that people showed up and used it, doesn’t really provide anything usable.
Hard no.
Forums are indexed by search engines: Problems/Solutions are findable.
Chat apps: Ephemeral endless stream of trivia intermixed mixed with Tech questions. Problems/Solutions not findable in search engines and lost forever.
IRC type comms are ok for immediate contact with the devs when the problem is urgent.
After dozens of posts, we can say that many people find the forum useful for using their Oma PCs and appreciate it. Some would continue using Oma even without the forum… or even with it. Some would even quit!
That is all good information to know that we may not have otherwise discovered. People that would quit over those circumstances aren’t really that invested in being here, so that’s not a factor at all.
See the previous response. It also baffles me that you consider it a waste of time, but wasted the time to tell us it was a waste of time. That is not exactly a very enlightened perspective.
Ne io ne gli italiani, in generale, pensiamo che la filosofia sia una perdita di tempo. Tutt’altro.
Intendevo dire che pragmaticame, la sostanza sta nella prima parte della risposta, nel resto del discorso stiamo parlando di ideali e concetti astratti che a volte è difficile riportare in pratica senza una corretta sintesi. C’è un modo di dire che riassume questo ed è “stiamo frggendo l’aria “ detto in maniera scherzosa.
Spero che il tuo traduttore riporti correttamente quello che intendo.
