Category talk:Events

From Noisebridge
Revision as of 08:00, 19 May 2014 by (Talk)

Jump to: navigation, search

it'd be nice if everybody would tag 'events' with [[category:events]]

gba 00:22, 15 October 2008 (PDT)


Looking for help to set up an event: OOTSIDEBOX project presentation at NOISEBRIDGE

Hi There,

I'm Jean Noël and I'm looking for help to finalize the organization of this event on Sat november 23th:

I plan to have up to 20 particpants, 10 guys already confirmed that they will come. To find out more about OOTSIDEBOX project:

Waiting for reply...

Best Regards Jean Noel

FWD Events Re-Direction

There is no reason to mention that I post my events to noisebridge-discuss and noisebridge-announce, "invariably" or not.

No one benefits from that information on the event listing - I'm trying to keep my description lean. JeffreyATW (talk) 20:45, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

-- (saved separately in case of future undo's)

Thanks for using this Category_talk:Events section.
But no, a certain percentage of people invariably see the fairly brief wiki event description here before viewing the listserve posting (assuming they're subscribed to either listserve). They'll subsequently be able to use the Discuss/Announce re-direction in its current state to effectively see timely reminders of the bi-weekly FWD highlights.
As a beneficial use-case scenario for those of us (who shall remain nameless) solely wishing to glean highlights of bi-weekly FWD events, this very re-direction filters out the large amount of discussion "noise" even better than subscribing to the Discuss list in Daily Digest mode.

Let's please keep it that way.

JavaScript Edits

The simple idea here is that beginning programmers are more likely to pick up JS material through the more elementary Front-end Web Development material than they necessarily would be from the EcmaScript programming language, DOM, Object Oriented JavaScript, and Events covered in THIS particular advanced JavaScript class. The FWD instructor, JeffreyATW, even routinely provides live video streams of the class for the convenience of his students (see [1]).

All in all, EVERYONE benefits by directing inexperienced coders to learn JS and other FWD techniques from the Front-end Web Development class and directing more experienced web developers and programmers of other languages to the JavaScript class.

Nthmost electing Nuclear option

11:47, 16 May 2014‎ Nthmost (Talk | contribs)‎ m . . (0)‎ . . (Protected "Category:Events": Excessive vandalism (‎[edit=autoconfirmed] (indefinite) ‎[move=autoconfirmed] (indefinite)))

Okay, what's done is done.

Can We Have an Actual Dialog Perhaps, Regarding the Nuclear option?

(Please continue to undercomment on the below discussion)

Naomi Theora, quite the disappointment that you remain bored and annoyed!
As yet another anonymous Tor Coward ('tho not a troll as the recent person submitting huge saggy 8008s pr0n), I am in favor of not only KEEPING BENEFICIAL ANONYMOUS COMMENTS, but also keeping some of the wikis anonymously editable. While there no doubt will be further wiki vandalism -- hopefully many fewer of those nasties aimed at Johny-Radio as of late >:O[ -- I still think the benefits of allowing limited anonymous edits outweigh the risks.
Even as you are likely reading this now, Naomi Theora, Sat night's apres-MakerFaire Party remains listed on the Wiki Events section; after MakerFaire itself and well over a full day past the Party event's ending. At the same time, we all (most of us anyway) Got Lives and are regularly busy working at our jobs. That obviously includes you, Naomi Theora, as well as other admins. Granting anonymous editing in situations such as the above would (a) greatly reduce efforts to have past listings linger on the main Wiki and (b) allow for much faster transitions from proposed Discuss list events into beneficial Wiki listings. Also see the Allow arguments at the Vote to prohibit anonymous edits you previously reviewed on the Discuss list.

In order to decrease the desire (yours?) to trace beneficial contributors, I've re-prioritized the Options at our disposal:

  • user and wiki pages' discussion (a.k.a. "talk") sections
  • creating an admin-acceptable user account, possibly by using Tor and an anonymized email address
  • emailing someone personally from such an anonymized and acceptable email address
  • Slack
  • the nb discuss list
  • the rack list

Just curious, Naomi Theora, are you even going so far as to consider deleting this Discussion Talk section as you did for your [Talk page]; due not only to the obvious chance of open vandalism as well as for reasons of your self-described boredom/annoyance/tiredness?? Because if you are, then that would clearly shut down yet another extra means of gaining constructive input.

And No b/c you inevitably bring this up, this particular anonymous Tor Coward is completely unable to attend the weekly SF meetings at night in person nor the various night workgroup sessions you've recently established.

(Again, please continue to undercomment on the above discussion)


Are you going to respond to the questions I have posed about how best to protect everyone's interests? Or are you just going to keep shouting in the wiki edit history and reviving things I wrote that I decided to delete?

--Nthmost (talk) 17:44, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Attention: It is super important to that the following text stay on this page:
Apparently so

Dearly misguided,

It would be easier to take suggestions if they actually, you know, came to our attention in some way. I'm not going to keep watching these Talk pages [correction: apparently I am --Nthmost (talk) 17:44, 18 May 2014 (UTC)]. The only reason I'm even here is that someone noticed a bunch of anonymous trollish edits coming from a particular IP address and sent me a link.

Options at your disposal:

  • creating a user account, possibly by using Tor and an anonymized email address.
  • user and wiki pages' discussion (a.k.a. "talk") sections
  • the nb-discuss list
  • Slack
  • emailing someone personally
  • the rack list

The so-called "nuclear option" (which isn't very "nuclear" at all; "nuclear" would be to wipe the whole wiki VM and start over) is temporary and only applies to a few pages. Feel free to troll elsewhere -- somewhere that doesn't matter as much to the continued well-being of the community.

It's of benefit to no-one to erase or make malicious subtle edits to event listings. If you're doing this, go do something productive for a change.

--Nthmost (talk) 22:15, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Current Nthmost edit leaves in-place an uber-untidy description redundancy [oh, sorry. err, why didn't you just edit it yourself? See questions below. --Nthmost (talk) 21:16, 17 May 2014 (UTC)]

and Nthmost shows zero signs of "temporarily" relenting on the Nuclear option applying to the most valid editable wiki pages.

[The "nuclear option" would be disallowing editing from non-admins, which hasn't been done and will not be done. --Nthmost (talk) 21:16, 17 May 2014 (UTC)]

Regardless of Nthmost's devious plans to eliminate anonymous edits (as below), let us hope that we all can contribute anonymous comments and beneficial comments that won't get so maliciously and quickly erased!

[My apologies; honestly didn't mean to disrespect anyone's voice. Trust that it wasn't malice, at least. Besides, if I were really trying to be devious, I would have created a new admin account and protected the front page with THAT, so that people wouldn't know it was me. --Nthmost (talk) 21:16, 17 May 2014 (UTC)]

... or Nthmost and her powerful committee-members can continue to blithely ignore suggestions like these

[Help me out here: how would YOU solve the problem of keeping the admins from getting burnt out defending the Event listings and other important noisebridge things from opportunistic destructive (not even interesting) trolling? --Nthmost (talk) 21:16, 17 May 2014 (UTC)]

[By the way,

  • *I took the above suggestion and made the edit.*

The current protection level is "block new and unregistered users from editing".

Is there some reason why making an account and editing a page is out of the question? I am honestly trying to understand. Anyone who wished to remain "anonymous" could easily still use a Tor node, create a throwaway email address to use for wiki editing, and make a meaninglessly-named user account. The point of protecting against anonymous editing is to create a friction to opportunistic destructive trolling.

I'm not try to be a dictator, I'm trying to protect everyone's interests. This is just an experiment and feedback is welcome (despite my initial knee-jerk reaction, which is why I deleted this section before.) I'll leave it here, since it's important to you.

--Nthmost (talk) 21:16, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Personal tools