[kde-community] Proposal: KDE Manifesto wording revision

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Monday, November 11, 2013 11:18:34 Eike Hein wrote:
> By disallowing direct write access for folks without a KDE
> contributor account, we're making them get KDE contributor
> accounts to gain write access. This ends up happening as a
> natural result of the tedium involved with proxying changes,
> and once they've got their accounts, there are few-to-no
> barriers between them and diversifying into other KDE pro-
> jects. Meanwhile, because everyone's been through the same
> process to get that account, this can work in terms of trust.

i fail to see how the ONLY clause addresses that in the least.

> I think you're locked into the idea "Eike and his ilk are
> just scared of the barbarians at the gates, this is classic
> tribalism!”, 

not at all; my concern is that is that literal wording in the manifesto 
describes a “barbarians at the gates” mentality. you may not have that in 
mind, but that’s what it states. 

it is so awkward that i honestly can not show it to people without them 
frowning to figure out just what the heck they read or me having to explain why 
it is so awkward.

i don’t think the ONLY clause inevitably leads to what you are hoping for, 
there are other methods people come into KDE by and emphasizing this 
particular one in such a manner within the Manifesto makes it incomplete.

i totally get what the language is trying to do from a social engineering 
perspective. i think we can do better than that wording, however.

> but my actual evil plan is to turn the, eh,
> barbarians at the gates into folks who accept responsibi-
> lity in KDE. Because I've *seen it work*.

i’m not disagreeing with that model. what i’m trying to point out is that the 
ONLY clause does nothing to help with that. what it did do was make the 
manifesto sound ham-fisted and awkward. it may make sense to you, but it’s 
actually quite opaque.

an obfuscated (intentionally or not) manifesto will only lead to it being 
poorly implemented at best and at worst worked against.

you’ve spent several emails explaining what you want to cause. i think we all 
agree that the “get more people in the KDE community” goal, along with the 
methodology you describe, is a good thing. 

what i’d prefer to discuss is:

* how the ONLY clause will actually work
* how we can open entry gateways using the manifesto that are more broadly 
encompassing as well as clearer in the formation

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo