From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5F4DC433E0 for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 15:25:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1F94206C3 for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 15:25:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="E80pTuKr" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728422AbgFKPZc (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:25:32 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:55638 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728104AbgFKPZc (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:25:32 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD5255DA51; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:25:31 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=WLkD8lXk57g4CijSm0c733zg9NY=; b=E80pTu KrcDrD56ED66hImftnzQu4zR5JEARd7UcfPvziW15Nl7HpkyNM8ygecv1lWI8BJg 8HewRhyc8TPe0LEeXmI0IFT/gjbM8fzZYpdHSCL+mwwsEGG9hokikrUJ/ko64HQT yjDZLA9wX8cF/a/tq1e9fTAfO4REBHh/B16PE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=hPrHLPXN26RBhID834tqKmiFgYeWpSYo GZvXuTOp0rnL7ov9qMOHjj0Ky11hf2JAWUWr3KPSY8lPjtEHYbGgLeAwSk3tQGVV p3lKE7RN8oPbKNwgEqi0wafsTc3PC6R3lNx/hDc4eynARYdDtPQbz0vI6TR/oOum JKDfcIB9C0I= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B29695DA50; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:25:31 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.196.173.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 156605DA4C; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:25:31 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Taylor Blau Cc: Emily Shaffer , Johannes Schindelin , "brian m. carlson" , Simon Pieters , Don Goodman-Wilson , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Virtual Inclusion Summit References: <20200610222719.GE148632@google.com> <20200611011040.GB21728@syl.local> <20200611023503.GA24130@syl.local> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 08:25:30 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20200611023503.GA24130@syl.local> (Taylor Blau's message of "Wed, 10 Jun 2020 20:35:03 -0600") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: C951A5FA-ABF7-11EA-982F-C28CBED8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Taylor Blau writes: > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 07:13:58PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Taylor Blau writes: >> >> >> It is OK to have an optional meeting in the hope that a video >> >> meeting may have a better chance to keep those who easily become too >> >> aggressive and confrontational in text-only conversation in check >> >> and instead have civilized conversation. >> ... >> What I am hesitant to see is that such an opt-in meeting becomes >> "you got a chance to attend and have your voice heard---if you >> didn't come, that was your choice, and whatever objection you give >> after it does not count" summit. > > Ah, thanks for your clarification (and sorry for the misunderstanding). > I figure that any synchronous discussion should augment the on-list > discussion, not replace it. By the way, if I sounded like I consider this "virtual summit" to be no more than just a place for people with heated head to deflate before having a civilized conversation, that was not my intention. I do agree that it is good to have some gathering (or perhaps a couple of them in shifting time to accomodate people from different parts of the world) to help make sure everybody is moving towards the same goal, and I have nothing against a virtual/video meeting for that purpose. Other than that it may be held on Zoom, where I do not particularly like to send people to, after seeing articles like [*1*], that is, but there may not be a viable alternative. I dunno. [Reference] *1* https://www.ft.com/content/f24bc9c6-ed95-4b31-a011-9e3fcd9cf006