i've been adding a lot of "rules" to my posts on here about what kind of replies I want ("no starting arguments!” "no explaining what a git commit is!”)
Here's a thread about why! Some of my goals are:
1. have nuanced discussions & stay on topic
2. hear from a diverse set of people
3. learn new things about how people use computers
let’s talk about each of them!
(1/11)
goal 1 is: have nuanced discussions! stay on topic!
When I started writing about git on here, every single time I made a post, people would reply with a HUGE range of thoughts and opinions about git which were totally unrelated to the question I asked.
This was a problem because it meant we could only have extremely surface level-discussions, and people’s hot takes were VERY repetitive. It felt like I was in a time loop — I even made a bingo card about it https://wizardzines.com/comics/git-discussion-bingo
(2/11)
When I say things like “please do not reply saying that you prefer rebase over merge”, it’s not because I think people who prefer rebase are “wrong”.
It’s because I’m trying to dig deeper and have a more nuanced discussion about a specific topic and I don’t want a very common opinion (“rebase is better than merge!”) to drown out other perspectives.
(3/11)
goal 2 is: hear from a diverse set of people!
I spent about 16 years on Twitter. Over time, I noticed that the people in my replies became pretty homogenous: for example I heard from women much less often than I wanted to.
I eventually realized that this was because I was allowing people to behave in a variety of unpleasant ways in my replies that was offputting.
(4/11)
So when I say things like “please don’t start weird arguments, please don’t explain what a git branch is to someone who didn’t ask you to, please don’t imply that everyone who uses computers in a different way from you is dumb and wrong”, that’s not only because I find those behaviours offputting.
It’s also because it drives away the people who I want to hear from.
(5/11)
Over time, if I continue to allow people to be unpleasant in my replies, it makes the set of folks who will talk to me on here narrower and narrower.
I’ve heard from friends that they don’t want to reply to my Mastodon threads because people have been assholes to them on here. That sucks.
(6/11)
One of the most common pieces of “advice” I hear from people is to use muting and blocking. I had hundreds (maybe thousands!) of people muted or blocked on Twitter, but it never really solved my problems.
Actually publicly talking about the kinds of behaviours that I’m trying to avoid on here has made a much bigger difference than muting or blocking people ever did, though I do still use those tools.
(7/11)
Allowing people to behave in unpleasant ways in my replies is also a problem because it makes it hard for me to boost cool posts — on Twitter I was sometimes reluctant to retweet posts by people I respected because I was worried my followers would embarrass me by saying something awful to the person I retweeted.
(8/11)
goal 3: learn new things about how people use computers!
One of my biggest frustations with programming is always: I’ll read some documentation, and I’ll wonder — okay, sure, but what are people ACTUALLY USING this software for? how are folks using it?
For example: it took me probably 3 years to figure out what kinds of problems strace is useful for. But we all use strace for the exact same things! This is a solved problem! (https://jvns.ca/blog/2021/04/03/what-problems-do-people-solve-with-strace/)
(9/11)
so when I say things like “please do not comment and tell people that they’re wrong to be using computers in the way they are” — I’m interested in knowing what people are ACTUALLY doing, even if that’s not the “optimal” thing.
Policing people makes it harder to find that out.
I’m really interested in collecting information about you can be “wrong” about how computers work and do things “wrong” and still get incredible work done
(10/11)
all of these rules have really made a huge difference to the quality of discussions we’ve been able to have on here. I’ve learned a huge amount about how people use and think about git and I really appreciate everyone who's been participating
(11/11)
This is an excellent set of rules and/or guidelines.
Documenting it:
Calling @Chartodon Spine ...
CC: @b0rk @brainwane
@b0rk I hope that my comment is kinda on topic because I have to tell you this:
Your work is amazing. All this time I've been enjoying your posts and the media that you're creating.
And your rules just emphasize what a wonderful person you are.
Have a wonderful day. 🌞
I really appreciate that, in all cases I remember, you are more specific than "don't start weird arguments", and would be happy if you continued that.
(The reason for my appreciation is that being more specific (a) helps me not fret on whether what I intend to do follows the request (b) intimates that specificity and directness are part of norms of the space, so let's me fret less about people being unhappy with what I'm doing without telling me that in an effective fashion.)
@b0rk I don't mean this in a derogatory way but more in a "you're probably wasting your time trying to push a rope" way: there's something that can be learned from all of this, and I'm sorry to say that it isn't that all of those people are wrong.
If you don't want to see thoughts and opinions on topics that a lot of people have thoughts and opinions about, the only way to avoid it is not to post about those topics in public where absolutely anyone can respond.
Expecting human behavior to change is setting your expectations way too high. There's little to no evidence that human beings at-large have any substantial capacity for nuanced communication, especially on social media.
Related: it might be nice if Mastodon had a feature where you could simply disable replies to a post; that way you COULD post on a topic like Git, where you know you're just going to hear a lot of the same tedious responses, and not have to deal with the incessant chiming from your notifications nor to wear out your BINGO stamp.
May I say - the bingo card is genius.
It's funny. It's gentle. And it hits distressingly close to home, so it addresses "but what I was going to say was *important*".
That's it. This is keen. We enjoy your stuff. Thank you for sharing.
Julia Evans
Stefan Rother-Stübs
Colin the Mathmo
fL0per
alexanderadam
Fink 
ThePfromtheO
Norman Wilson
vv221
Matrixes
mfriedenhagen
secana
schuelermine
Abraxas3d
bEA 🔓
robryk
Ivo Limmen
Andy Smith
Paul David
soaproot
Nicklas Johnson 🏳️🌈
Tom Bortels
Gomijacogeo