Hey,
I want to propose the idea of having localized mailing lists. It is obvious that there is a language barrier for users, volunteers and new contributors that don't handle english very well or at all. Yes, you could say that having yet another mailing list won't help, but I would argue that for non-english speakers might be a space for discussion and communication that you might not find in lists such as tor-talk, tor-dev or tor-project. Mailing lists in plural sounds scary so I propose to start with the following:
Name: tor-lang-es@lists.torproject.org (according to #15140 [0] the main issue in the past was the name).
Purpose: General discussion in Spanish, including announcements, user questions and technical discussion.
For what I have seen and heard of events in Latin America I think there is enough "critical mass" to consider this. And if we do, there is a good chance this community gets more cohesion and grow.
Someone might "hey, but if we have a mailing list for language X, we should have one for language Y". To avoid this (supposing that we want) we could set some requirements like for example there should be at least one core member willing to run the list.
Looking forward to discuss the idea.
[0] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/15140
Saludos. --i
Hi ilv,
ilv@torproject.org:
I want to propose the idea of having localized mailing lists. It is obvious that there is a language barrier for users, volunteers and new contributors that don't handle english very well or at all. Yes, you could say that having yet another mailing list won't help, but I would argue that for non-english speakers might be a space for discussion and communication that you might not find in lists such as tor-talk, tor-dev or tor-project.
I can verify that this is a fact according to my life experience in LATAM and makes a lot of sense to have such a LATAM (language) specific mailing list.
Mailing lists in plural sounds scary so I propose to start with the following:
Name: tor-lang-es@lists.torproject.org (according to #15140 [0] the main issue in the past was the name).
Purpose: General discussion in Spanish, including announcements, user questions and technical discussion.
Do you think that including discussion in Portuguese will make sense?
For what I have seen and heard of events in Latin America I think there is enough "critical mass" to consider this. And if we do, there is a good chance this community gets more cohesion and grow.
What if we use the global-south mailing list? From what I know there are already a lot of people from LATAM there and many discussions take place in Portuñol (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portu%C3%B1ol), this way we are not going to lose people in the process of moving/migrating to another mailing list.
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
Saudações, ~Vasilis
On 4/6/18 8:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Hi ilv,
ilv@torproject.org:
I want to propose the idea of having localized mailing lists. It is obvious that there is a language barrier for users, volunteers and new contributors that don't handle english very well or at all. Yes, you could say that having yet another mailing list won't help, but I would argue that for non-english speakers might be a space for discussion and communication that you might not find in lists such as tor-talk, tor-dev or tor-project.
Thank you Israel for organizing this proposal :) I think we are growing and we are seeing the need more and more. This has been discussed a few times (we were together on the discussion) where we thought we needed to be more mobilized as Tor and have more people involved to open one lang specific list and I think we are now, at least with Spanish :)
I would say that this should be created on the need basis, as you are doing. So folks don't feel we have to go and open a list for every language on the planet at this right moment ;)
Mailing lists in plural sounds scary so I propose to start with the following:
Name: tor-lang-es@lists.torproject.org (according to #15140 [0] the main issue in the past was the name).
Purpose: General discussion in Spanish, including announcements, user questions and technical discussion.
Do you think that including discussion in Portuguese will make sense?
I would not include PT - not that people don't like each other :) but I think PT will have a critical mass of its own and soon could open it's own lang list for discussion in PT.
For what I have seen and heard of events in Latin America I think there is enough "critical mass" to consider this. And if we do, there is a good chance this community gets more cohesion and grow.
What if we use the global-south mailing list?
I agree with Israel on the critical mass. As I said above, I remember the meeting in Montreal and the idea of the global-south list was more to kick off the initiative but we knew the need for language specific lists existed but was waiting to build the critical mass around it. Which we have done a great job so far :) that is why we are now ready for ES list! \o/ viva
From what I know there are already a lot of people from LATAM there and many discussions take place in Portuñol (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portu%C3%B1ol), this way we are not going to lose people in the process of moving/migrating to another mailing list.
I would not worry about the migration of folks, we can send an email to the global south list letting people know and also reminders whenever its appropriated, like in a reply to a new person writing to global-south in Spanish.
Thanks, isabela
Hi,
On 4/6/18 8:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Hi ilv,
ilv@torproject.org:
I want to propose the idea of having localized mailing lists. It is obvious that there is a language barrier for users, volunteers and new contributors that don't handle english very well or at all. Yes, you could say that having yet another mailing list won't help, but I would argue that for non-english speakers might be a space for discussion and communication that you might not find in lists such as tor-talk, tor-dev or tor-project.
Thank you Israel for organizing this proposal :) I think we are growing and we are seeing the need more and more. This has been discussed a few times (we were together on the discussion) where we thought we needed to be more mobilized as Tor and have more people involved to open one lang specific list and I think we are now, at least with Spanish :)
I would say that this should be created on the need basis, as you are doing. So folks don't feel we have to go and open a list for every language on the planet at this right moment ;)
Yes, I agree :) I think there is a critical mass for other languages as well but we should go with the need basis.
Mailing lists in plural sounds scary so I propose to start with the following:
Name: tor-lang-es@lists.torproject.org (according to #15140 [0] the main issue in the past was the name).
Purpose: General discussion in Spanish, including announcements, user questions and technical discussion.
Do you think that including discussion in Portuguese will make sense?
I would not include PT - not that people don't like each other :) but I think PT will have a critical mass of its own and soon could open it's own lang list for discussion in PT.
I also agree on this, PT has it mass on its own.
For what I have seen and heard of events in Latin America I think there is enough "critical mass" to consider this. And if we do, there is a good chance this community gets more cohesion and grow.
What if we use the global-south mailing list?
I agree with Israel on the critical mass. As I said above, I remember the meeting in Montreal and the idea of the global-south list was more to kick off the initiative but we knew the need for language specific lists existed but was waiting to build the critical mass around it. Which we have done a great job so far :) that is why we are now ready for ES list! \o/ viva
From what I know there are already a lot of people from LATAM there and many discussions take place in Portuñol (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portu%C3%B1ol), this way we are not going to lose people in the process of moving/migrating to another mailing list.
I would not worry about the migration of folks, we can send an email to the global south list letting people know and also reminders whenever its appropriated, like in a reply to a new person writing to global-south in Spanish.
I wouldn't want LATAM to "take over" the global south list. IMO it has a different purpose and we would be excluding existing members and newcomers from other places (i.e. India).
Saludos. --i
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
I think this is a great idea y espero poder hablar español contigo! Thanks for the proposal Isra.
I think Isa is right that the global-south list should remain as it is and Isra's ES-lang list is the right place for this new initiative.
On 04/06/2018 07:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
I agree that the name "global-south" is suboptimal, but we've had multiple conversations about this (I think you've been there for at least a couple of them), most recently discussions in Rome, where the rough consensus was that the name is problematic but less problematic than other choices and there isn't a better option that's widely recognized. So it's not exactly true that no one has gone into the process of changing it...it's been discussed in every meeting I've been in related to global south initiatives.
I also love this idea! Shari
On Apr 6, 2018, at 7:26 AM, Alison Macrina alison@torproject.org wrote:
Signed PGP part I think this is a great idea y espero poder hablar español contigo! Thanks for the proposal Isra.
I think Isa is right that the global-south list should remain as it is and Isra's ES-lang list is the right place for this new initiative.
On 04/06/2018 07:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
I agree that the name "global-south" is suboptimal, but we've had multiple conversations about this (I think you've been there for at least a couple of them), most recently discussions in Rome, where the rough consensus was that the name is problematic but less problematic than other choices and there isn't a better option that's widely recognized. So it's not exactly true that no one has gone into the process of changing it...it's been discussed in every meeting I've been in related to global south initiatives.
tor-project mailing list tor-project@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-project
Shari Steele:
I also love this idea! Shari
reordering inline posting below...
On Apr 6, 2018, at 7:26 AM, Alison Macrina alison@torproject.org wrote:
Signed PGP part I think this is a great idea y espero poder hablar español contigo! Thanks for the proposal Isra.
I think Isa is right that the global-south list should remain as it is and Isra's ES-lang list is the right place for this new initiative.
There's a few questions embedded in this proposal.
First, we have to differentiate between language- and region-based lists, with regions being defined by geography and language.
As someone who has spawned more dead-on-arrival lists than most, I'm apprehensive about two things:
1. creating lists for a perceived gap which ultimately die
2. creating lists that siphon off discussion from existing lists
In terms of languages, I don't know enough about the critical mass, but I would assume there is more than enough of a base for an ES list, at the very minimum. And PT_BR is obviously another solid option.
The problems become a proliferation of lists that someone, say, who is an ES speaker *should* sub to. Now it's @global-south, plus the ES list, but then what about the regional question.
Then the regional lists which should also be set with the respective language. But the regional list would likely be less of a Tor usage discussion than an organizing list, I'd guess.
Language lists are primarily meant to provide a channel for non-English speakers, to state the obvious.
I'm thinking very much out loud here. I worry about a proliferation of lists which take away from the main channels for discussion.
I'm supportive of creating new language and/or regional lists, the relevant people from those groups need to consider the utility in terms of audience and purpose. Think technical discussion versus organizing. If there's an ES list, it should likely be software-focused, since it's the language issue that's being approached. It can assist ES-speakers in LATAM, EU and beyond. But a regional list (which should be designated with the respective language) is more likely an organizing tool.
An ES list that goes into the organizing specifics of a local event in LATAM will only make ES speakers not from the region yawn.
Sorry if I seem to be dancing around the issue here. I think articulating "for whom" and "about what" for a list is vital. Dead lists help no one, and lists that just put more on the plate of a few Tor people need to be avoided.
Maybe it makes sense to start with an ES list and see how it goes?
Mailing lists are often chicken-and-egg problems... if you don't have the list, you don't recognize there's an audience.
On 04/06/2018 07:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
I agree that the name "global-south" is suboptimal, but we've had multiple conversations about this (I think you've been there for at least a couple of them), most recently discussions in Rome, where the rough consensus was that the name is problematic but less problematic than other choices and there isn't a better option that's widely recognized. So it's not exactly true that no one has gone into the process of changing it...it's been discussed in every meeting I've been in related to global south initiatives.
Am I incorrect to think that @global-south list is really LATAM anyways?
We should probably move towards a LATAM list to replace @global-south. It *seems* to be what the list is in practice. And maybe sticking to some combination of language- and region-specific lists is the right direction.
g
Hi,
Em Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 03:30:00PM +0000, George escreveu:
Shari Steele:
I also love this idea! Shari
reordering inline posting below...
On Apr 6, 2018, at 7:26 AM, Alison Macrina alison@torproject.org wrote:
Signed PGP part I think this is a great idea y espero poder hablar español contigo! Thanks for the proposal Isra.
I think Isa is right that the global-south list should remain as it is and Isra's ES-lang list is the right place for this new initiative.
There's a few questions embedded in this proposal.
First, we have to differentiate between language- and region-based lists, with regions being defined by geography and language.
As someone who has spawned more dead-on-arrival lists than most, I'm apprehensive about two things:
creating lists for a perceived gap which ultimately die
creating lists that siphon off discussion from existing lists
In terms of languages, I don't know enough about the critical mass, but I would assume there is more than enough of a base for an ES list, at the very minimum. And PT_BR is obviously another solid option.
The problems become a proliferation of lists that someone, say, who is an ES speaker *should* sub to. Now it's @global-south, plus the ES list, but then what about the regional question.
Then the regional lists which should also be set with the respective language. But the regional list would likely be less of a Tor usage discussion than an organizing list, I'd guess.
Language lists are primarily meant to provide a channel for non-English speakers, to state the obvious.
I'm thinking very much out loud here. I worry about a proliferation of lists which take away from the main channels for discussion.
I'm supportive of creating new language and/or regional lists, the relevant people from those groups need to consider the utility in terms of audience and purpose. Think technical discussion versus organizing. If there's an ES list, it should likely be software-focused, since it's the language issue that's being approached. It can assist ES-speakers in LATAM, EU and beyond. But a regional list (which should be designated with the respective language) is more likely an organizing tool.
I think the geographic and the language approach can work together and aren't competitive: one or other.
An ES list that goes into the organizing specifics of a local event in LATAM will only make ES speakers not from the region yawn.
Sorry if I seem to be dancing around the issue here. I think articulating "for whom" and "about what" for a list is vital. Dead lists help no one, and lists that just put more on the plate of a few Tor people need to be avoided.
Maybe it makes sense to start with an ES list and see how it goes?
Mailing lists are often chicken-and-egg problems... if you don't have the list, you don't recognize there's an audience.
On 04/06/2018 07:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
I agree that the name "global-south" is suboptimal, but we've had multiple conversations about this (I think you've been there for at least a couple of them), most recently discussions in Rome, where the rough consensus was that the name is problematic but less problematic than other choices and there isn't a better option that's widely recognized. So it's not exactly true that no one has gone into the process of changing it...it's been discussed in every meeting I've been in related to global south initiatives.
Am I incorrect to think that @global-south list is really LATAM anyways?
At the moment, I'd say yes, it's almost majority LATAM. But,
We should probably move towards a LATAM list to replace @global-south. It *seems* to be what the list is in practice. And maybe sticking to some combination of language- and region-specific lists is the right direction.
I think the GS initiative started well and actively engaged LATAM community.
To take away Global-south and replace only with LATAM, is a bad idea; what we are going to do with the ppl that aren't from LATAM in the mailing list?
We need to think what's the next part of GS that we need/want to engage. It's part of this year roadmap to move to others GS-regions?
I'd go step by step: open first the new lang based mailing list and then go to the new region/latam thing.
cheers, gus
Hi,
There's a few questions embedded in this proposal.
First, we have to differentiate between language- and region-based lists, with regions being defined by geography and language.
As someone who has spawned more dead-on-arrival lists than most, I'm apprehensive about two things:
creating lists for a perceived gap which ultimately die
creating lists that siphon off discussion from existing lists
In terms of languages, I don't know enough about the critical mass, but I would assume there is more than enough of a base for an ES list, at the very minimum. And PT_BR is obviously another solid option.
The problems become a proliferation of lists that someone, say, who is an ES speaker *should* sub to. Now it's @global-south, plus the ES list, but then what about the regional question.
I would prefer to open more spaces than to think what they *should* do.
Then the regional lists which should also be set with the respective language. But the regional list would likely be less of a Tor usage discussion than an organizing list, I'd guess.
Language lists are primarily meant to provide a channel for non-English speakers, to state the obvious.
I'm thinking very much out loud here. I worry about a proliferation of lists which take away from the main channels for discussion.
The idea is to open space for discussions that are not currently happening the main channels, such as other mailing lists or IRC channels.
I'm supportive of creating new language and/or regional lists, the relevant people from those groups need to consider the utility in terms of audience and purpose. Think technical discussion versus organizing. If there's an ES list, it should likely be software-focused, since it's the language issue that's being approached. It can assist ES-speakers in LATAM, EU and beyond. But a regional list (which should be designated with the respective language) is more likely an organizing tool.
An ES list that goes into the organizing specifics of a local event in LATAM will only make ES speakers not from the region yawn.
Sorry if I seem to be dancing around the issue here. I think articulating "for whom" and "about what" for a list is vital. Dead lists help no one, and lists that just put more on the plate of a few Tor people need to be avoided.
Maybe it makes sense to start with an ES list and see how it goes?
Yes, thanks for all the feedback. I think we could perfectly use a localized list as a support, discussion and organizing tool. But we really don't know if we don't try, so let's see how it goes :)
Mailing lists are often chicken-and-egg problems... if you don't have the list, you don't recognize there's an audience.
On 04/06/2018 07:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
I agree that the name "global-south" is suboptimal, but we've had multiple conversations about this (I think you've been there for at least a couple of them), most recently discussions in Rome, where the rough consensus was that the name is problematic but less problematic than other choices and there isn't a better option that's widely recognized. So it's not exactly true that no one has gone into the process of changing it...it's been discussed in every meeting I've been in related to global south initiatives.
Am I incorrect to think that @global-south list is really LATAM anyways?
We should probably move towards a LATAM list to replace @global-south. It *seems* to be what the list is in practice. And maybe sticking to some combination of language- and region-specific lists is the right direction.
g
Saludos. --i
On 04/09/18 17:36, ilv@torproject.org wrote:
Hi,
There's a few questions embedded in this proposal.
First, we have to differentiate between language- and region-based lists, with regions being defined by geography and language.
As someone who has spawned more dead-on-arrival lists than most, I'm apprehensive about two things:
creating lists for a perceived gap which ultimately die
creating lists that siphon off discussion from existing lists
In terms of languages, I don't know enough about the critical mass, but I would assume there is more than enough of a base for an ES list, at the very minimum. And PT_BR is obviously another solid option.
The problems become a proliferation of lists that someone, say, who is an ES speaker *should* sub to. Now it's @global-south, plus the ES list, but then what about the regional question.
I would prefer to open more spaces than to think what they *should* do.
Then the regional lists which should also be set with the respective language. But the regional list would likely be less of a Tor usage discussion than an organizing list, I'd guess.
Language lists are primarily meant to provide a channel for non-English speakers, to state the obvious.
I'm thinking very much out loud here. I worry about a proliferation of lists which take away from the main channels for discussion.
The idea is to open space for discussions that are not currently happening the main channels, such as other mailing lists or IRC channels.
I'm supportive of creating new language and/or regional lists, the relevant people from those groups need to consider the utility in terms of audience and purpose. Think technical discussion versus organizing. If there's an ES list, it should likely be software-focused, since it's the language issue that's being approached. It can assist ES-speakers in LATAM, EU and beyond. But a regional list (which should be designated with the respective language) is more likely an organizing tool.
An ES list that goes into the organizing specifics of a local event in LATAM will only make ES speakers not from the region yawn.
Sorry if I seem to be dancing around the issue here. I think articulating "for whom" and "about what" for a list is vital. Dead lists help no one, and lists that just put more on the plate of a few Tor people need to be avoided.
Maybe it makes sense to start with an ES list and see how it goes?
Yes, thanks for all the feedback. I think we could perfectly use a localized list as a support, discussion and organizing tool. But we really don't know if we don't try, so let's see how it goes :)
Mailing lists are often chicken-and-egg problems... if you don't have the list, you don't recognize there's an audience.
On 04/06/2018 07:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
I agree that the name "global-south" is suboptimal, but we've had multiple conversations about this (I think you've been there for at least a couple of them), most recently discussions in Rome, where the rough consensus was that the name is problematic but less problematic than other choices and there isn't a better option that's widely recognized. So it's not exactly true that no one has gone into the process of changing it...it's been discussed in every meeting I've been in related to global south initiatives.
Am I incorrect to think that @global-south list is really LATAM anyways?
We should probably move towards a LATAM list to replace @global-south. It *seems* to be what the list is in practice. And maybe sticking to some combination of language- and region-specific lists is the right direction.
g
Saludos.
Maybe an operational way to start this would be to do a blog post about the specific list being launched? Then getting it tweeted, circulated in the appropriate language sites, etc?
It would be one way to conjure up interest...
Just to be clear, I'm all *for* any and all lists, reaching out and diversifying the project. I just think spawning lists that are dead-on-arrival should be avoided. Building out the structure for it without the critical mass is the issue IMHO.
g
g
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 05:59:56PM -0400, George wrote:
On 04/09/18 17:36, ilv@torproject.org wrote:
Hi,
There's a few questions embedded in this proposal.
First, we have to differentiate between language- and region-based lists, with regions being defined by geography and language.
As someone who has spawned more dead-on-arrival lists than most, I'm apprehensive about two things:
creating lists for a perceived gap which ultimately die
creating lists that siphon off discussion from existing lists
In terms of languages, I don't know enough about the critical mass, but I would assume there is more than enough of a base for an ES list, at the very minimum. And PT_BR is obviously another solid option.
The problems become a proliferation of lists that someone, say, who is an ES speaker *should* sub to. Now it's @global-south, plus the ES list, but then what about the regional question.
I would prefer to open more spaces than to think what they *should* do.
Then the regional lists which should also be set with the respective language. But the regional list would likely be less of a Tor usage discussion than an organizing list, I'd guess.
Language lists are primarily meant to provide a channel for non-English speakers, to state the obvious.
I'm thinking very much out loud here. I worry about a proliferation of lists which take away from the main channels for discussion.
The idea is to open space for discussions that are not currently happening the main channels, such as other mailing lists or IRC channels.
I'm supportive of creating new language and/or regional lists, the relevant people from those groups need to consider the utility in terms of audience and purpose. Think technical discussion versus organizing. If there's an ES list, it should likely be software-focused, since it's the language issue that's being approached. It can assist ES-speakers in LATAM, EU and beyond. But a regional list (which should be designated with the respective language) is more likely an organizing tool.
An ES list that goes into the organizing specifics of a local event in LATAM will only make ES speakers not from the region yawn.
Sorry if I seem to be dancing around the issue here. I think articulating "for whom" and "about what" for a list is vital. Dead lists help no one, and lists that just put more on the plate of a few Tor people need to be avoided.
Maybe it makes sense to start with an ES list and see how it goes?
Yes, thanks for all the feedback. I think we could perfectly use a localized list as a support, discussion and organizing tool. But we really don't know if we don't try, so let's see how it goes :)
Mailing lists are often chicken-and-egg problems... if you don't have the list, you don't recognize there's an audience.
On 04/06/2018 07:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
I agree that the name "global-south" is suboptimal, but we've had multiple conversations about this (I think you've been there for at least a couple of them), most recently discussions in Rome, where the rough consensus was that the name is problematic but less problematic than other choices and there isn't a better option that's widely recognized. So it's not exactly true that no one has gone into the process of changing it...it's been discussed in every meeting I've been in related to global south initiatives.
Am I incorrect to think that @global-south list is really LATAM anyways?
We should probably move towards a LATAM list to replace @global-south. It *seems* to be what the list is in practice. And maybe sticking to some combination of language- and region-specific lists is the right direction.
g
Saludos.
Maybe an operational way to start this would be to do a blog post about the specific list being launched? Then getting it tweeted, circulated in the appropriate language sites, etc?
It would be one way to conjure up interest...
Very good idea, thanks. I'm sure we can manage to do something like this.
--i
I'd like to suggest, in addition to creating one or more new localized lists, we could explicitly state somewhere prominent* that posts to our main mailing lists in *any* language are very welcome. No one should hesitate to post in their preferred language.
* Such as https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:36 PM, ilv@torproject.org wrote:
Hi,
There's a few questions embedded in this proposal.
First, we have to differentiate between language- and region-based lists, with regions being defined by geography and language.
As someone who has spawned more dead-on-arrival lists than most, I'm apprehensive about two things:
creating lists for a perceived gap which ultimately die
creating lists that siphon off discussion from existing lists
In terms of languages, I don't know enough about the critical mass, but I would assume there is more than enough of a base for an ES list, at the very minimum. And PT_BR is obviously another solid option.
The problems become a proliferation of lists that someone, say, who is an ES speaker *should* sub to. Now it's @global-south, plus the ES list, but then what about the regional question.
I would prefer to open more spaces than to think what they *should* do.
Then the regional lists which should also be set with the respective language. But the regional list would likely be less of a Tor usage discussion than an organizing list, I'd guess.
Language lists are primarily meant to provide a channel for non-English speakers, to state the obvious.
I'm thinking very much out loud here. I worry about a proliferation of lists which take away from the main channels for discussion.
The idea is to open space for discussions that are not currently happening the main channels, such as other mailing lists or IRC channels.
I'm supportive of creating new language and/or regional lists, the relevant people from those groups need to consider the utility in terms of audience and purpose. Think technical discussion versus organizing. If there's an ES list, it should likely be software-focused, since it's the language issue that's being approached. It can assist ES-speakers in LATAM, EU and beyond. But a regional list (which should be designated with the respective language) is more likely an organizing tool.
An ES list that goes into the organizing specifics of a local event in LATAM will only make ES speakers not from the region yawn.
Sorry if I seem to be dancing around the issue here. I think articulating "for whom" and "about what" for a list is vital. Dead lists help no one, and lists that just put more on the plate of a few Tor people need to be avoided.
Maybe it makes sense to start with an ES list and see how it goes?
Yes, thanks for all the feedback. I think we could perfectly use a localized list as a support, discussion and organizing tool. But we really don't know if we don't try, so let's see how it goes :)
Mailing lists are often chicken-and-egg problems... if you don't have the list, you don't recognize there's an audience.
On 04/06/2018 07:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
I agree that the name "global-south" is suboptimal, but we've had multiple conversations about this (I think you've been there for at least a couple of them), most recently discussions in Rome, where the rough consensus was that the name is problematic but less problematic than other choices and there isn't a better option that's widely recognized. So it's not exactly true that no one has gone into the process of changing it...it's been discussed in every meeting I've been in related to global south initiatives.
Am I incorrect to think that @global-south list is really LATAM anyways?
We should probably move towards a LATAM list to replace @global-south. It *seems* to be what the list is in practice. And maybe sticking to some combination of language- and region-specific lists is the right direction.
g
Saludos. --i
tor-project mailing list tor-project@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-project
Alison Macrina:
On 04/06/2018 07:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
I agree that the name "global-south" is suboptimal, but we've had multiple conversations about this (I think you've been there for at least a couple of them), most recently discussions in Rome, where the rough consensus was that the name is problematic but less problematic than other choices and there isn't a better option that's widely recognized.
Many people from LATAM don't usually like this term and unfortunately these people are not with us during the Tor meetings. Personally I have been questioned about the name 'global-south' in Chile, Argentina and various regions in Brazil. For anyone interest in the topic, some basic info on why this term is not ideal to many people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_South#Debates_over_the_term
So it's not exactly true that no one has gone into the process of changing it...it's been discussed in every meeting I've been in related to global south initiatives.
Doesn't the term 'global south' being discussed in every meeting justifies the significant importance of this issue, otherwise would it be a thing to discuss?
Saudações, ~Vasilis
On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 03:19:00PM +0000, Vasilis wrote:
Alison Macrina:
On 04/06/2018 07:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
I agree that the name "global-south" is suboptimal, but we've had multiple conversations about this (I think you've been there for at least a couple of them), most recently discussions in Rome, where the rough consensus was that the name is problematic but less problematic than other choices and there isn't a better option that's widely recognized.
Many people from LATAM don't usually like this term and unfortunately these people are not with us during the Tor meetings. Personally I have been questioned about the name 'global-south' in Chile, Argentina and various regions in Brazil. For anyone interest in the topic, some basic info on why this term is not ideal to many people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_South#Debates_over_the_term
So it's not exactly true that no one has gone into the process of changing it...it's been discussed in every meeting I've been in related to global south initiatives.
Doesn't the term 'global south' being discussed in every meeting justifies the significant importance of this issue, otherwise would it be a thing to discuss?
Aside: This is a comment only about the terminology and how that may be masking deeper issues with the concepts behind it. I support the initiative of the specific suggestions in this thread that sparked these questions. I am also happy to leave working out specifics of how to pursue those initiatives to those who are trying to best make this work for themselves and those they know.
Tor has grown a lot since it was just me, Roger, and Nick and a handful of relays at MIT. But that growth has clearly been culturally and geographically unevenly distributed, across users, developers, operators, outreach focus, etc. The cultural, linguistic, geographic, geo-political underrepresented populations are themselves diverse and unique. From Tor's perspective what they have in common is that they are broadly underrepresented. If Tor attempts to address this as a general area of concern, then whatever term it uses will be lumping a lot of distinct groups together. As long as we attempt _at all_ to address this area generally, then that will be so even if most of the discussion and action gets appropriately focused on individual groups/languages/geo-political entities/etc.
Perhaps this term itself has so much baggage that it just has to go. I'm not familiar enough with the context to know. But, limiting just to Tor and not other related social/economic/technical areas that face overlapping problems and from some of whom "global south" was taken, here's the question: Will it help to come up with another term-du-jour, or will it that term also quickly pass into resentment and annoyance for those from the third world/underdeveloped nations/global south/whatever other dubious terminology I don't know about/ who end up getting grouped under it? If so what could we do, short of declining to recognize and address this uneven distribution of Tor as a general problem and only recognizing individual specific instances of it?
Perhaps it would be at least a little better if we come up with some term that doesn't inherit the non-Tor baggage of those other terms? For example, I notice I used the term 'underrepresented' above in trying to avoid already laden or used terminology. If Tor people start using 'underrepresented' as a convenient way to refer to recognizable significant geographic/linguistic/cultural groups Tor could generally be much better serving/connected to/ then will that become a problematic term for the same reasons? Even if coming up with a Tor-specific or not-currently-loaded term is better in that sense, will it not be worth the cost of failing to have recognizable-term efforts in the eyes of international development entities that might provide Tor with funding or other support?
I don't have clear answers to the questions I raised. I just wanted to note that any effort spent simply replacing 'global south' with a better term may not actually do much to address the issues we are attributing on the term itself. (And mea culpa, this message is lousy with idiomatic US-specific and even maybe Paul-specific phraseology, but don't have time to improve it now, gotta run. ;>)
HTH, Paul
On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 09:26:46AM -0500, Alison Macrina wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
I think this is a great idea y espero poder hablar español contigo! Thanks for the proposal Isra.
De nada :) I have opened #25755 [0] to continue with the discussion, specially about the name.
I think Isa is right that the global-south list should remain as it is and Isra's ES-lang list is the right place for this new initiative.
On 04/06/2018 07:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
I agree that the name "global-south" is suboptimal, but we've had multiple conversations about this (I think you've been there for at least a couple of them), most recently discussions in Rome, where the rough consensus was that the name is problematic but less problematic than other choices and there isn't a better option that's widely recognized. So it's not exactly true that no one has gone into the process of changing it...it's been discussed in every meeting I've been in related to global south initiatives.
[0] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/25755
Saludos. --i
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:48:31PM -0300, ilv@torproject.org wrote:
On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 09:26:46AM -0500, Alison Macrina wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
I think this is a great idea y espero poder hablar español contigo! Thanks for the proposal Isra.
De nada :) I have opened #25755 [0] to continue with the discussion, specially about the name.
Since not all people use in trac I'd like to give some time to discuss the future name of the list. I have three ideas:
1) tor-lang-es (accurate, but also complicated) 2) tor-spanish (instead of tor-es, avoiding future conflicts such as tor-pt) 3) tor-espanol (could be easier for locals)
I proposed this on the ticket as well and I'll be updating it if people prefer to reply here.
Looking forward to hear your opinions.
I think Isa is right that the global-south list should remain as it is and Isra's ES-lang list is the right place for this new initiative.
On 04/06/2018 07:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
I agree that the name "global-south" is suboptimal, but we've had multiple conversations about this (I think you've been there for at least a couple of them), most recently discussions in Rome, where the rough consensus was that the name is problematic but less problematic than other choices and there isn't a better option that's widely recognized. So it's not exactly true that no one has gone into the process of changing it...it's been discussed in every meeting I've been in related to global south initiatives.
[0] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/25755
Saludos. --i
tor-project mailing list tor-project@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-project
* ilv@torproject.org schrieb am 2018-04-11 um 04:52 Uhr:
- tor-lang-es (accurate, but also complicated)
- tor-spanish (instead of tor-es, avoiding future conflicts such as tor-pt)
- tor-espanol (could be easier for locals)
I proposed this on the ticket as well and I'll be updating it if people prefer to reply here.
I'd propose tor-talk-es, because tor-talk is our "main" list and attaching an ISO 639 code makes it clear that this is a list for spanish language. Furthermore this would allow to extend other lists (tor-dev-es, tor-relays-es, etc.) if there is enough interest.
On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 07:30:53PM -0300, ilv@torproject.org wrote:
Someone might "hey, but if we have a mailing list for language X, we should have one for language Y". To avoid this (supposing that we want) we could set some requirements like for example there should be at least one core member willing to run the list.
I think yes, we should try the experiment of making this list and seeing how it goes.
I like your notion of "there should be at least one core member willing to run the list." I'm tempted to suggest "at least two" to prove that we have some sort of critical mass before making a list, but I think we can figure out the more exact policies when we have tried this list and we're considering a second one.
But to be clear, it needs to be more than just "one core member interesting in *starting* the list" -- they need to commit to *running* the list, meaning keeping its discussions on track, moderated against trolls, etc.
A second principle that I would propose is that we have a periodic check-in point, like every six months or something, to decide whether the experiment is working as intended. If the list hasn't been used much lately at the check-in time, or things are otherwise not going as you originally imagined, that's a great time to decide to change things.
George is totally right that there are risks with creating new lists, first because maybe you make a list that never takes off, frustrating the people who signed up hoping it would be something, but second because splitting communities can kill existing lists *too*.
So a third principle that I would propose is that the list runners should keep an eye out for things that happen on the list that people from the more "mainstream" lists probably want to know about, and send a periodic summary or something. Same thing goes for watching other lists for things that folks on the new list probably want to know about. And if you find yourself spending a lot of time telling people from different lists about what happened on the other lists, then it's time to stop and wonder if things are set up wrong.
--Roger
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:45:50AM -0400, Roger Dingledine wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 07:30:53PM -0300, ilv@torproject.org wrote:
Someone might "hey, but if we have a mailing list for language X, we should have one for language Y". To avoid this (supposing that we want) we could set some requirements like for example there should be at least one core member willing to run the list.
I think yes, we should try the experiment of making this list and seeing how it goes.
I like your notion of "there should be at least one core member willing to run the list." I'm tempted to suggest "at least two" to prove that we have some sort of critical mass before making a list, but I think we can figure out the more exact policies when we have tried this list and we're considering a second one.
But to be clear, it needs to be more than just "one core member interesting in *starting* the list" -- they need to commit to *running* the list, meaning keeping its discussions on track, moderated against trolls, etc.
I agree. And in this case that's what I was thinking when I offered to maintain the list.
A second principle that I would propose is that we have a periodic check-in point, like every six months or something, to decide whether the experiment is working as intended. If the list hasn't been used much lately at the check-in time, or things are otherwise not going as you originally imagined, that's a great time to decide to change things.
Yes, we can evaluate the status of this (and others if we go for it) at each Tor meeting.
George is totally right that there are risks with creating new lists, first because maybe you make a list that never takes off, frustrating the people who signed up hoping it would be something, but second because splitting communities can kill existing lists *too*.
So a third principle that I would propose is that the list runners should keep an eye out for things that happen on the list that people from the more "mainstream" lists probably want to know about, and send a periodic summary or something. Same thing goes for watching other lists for things that folks on the new list probably want to know about. And if you find yourself spending a lot of time telling people from different lists about what happened on the other lists, then it's time to stop and wonder if things are set up wrong.
Makes sense. I can do that for this first list and after some time we can evaluate how it is going.
Thanks for the comments, --i
tor-project@lists.torproject.org
-
Alison Macrina -
Arthur D. Edelstein -
George -
gus -
ilv＠torproject.org -
isabela -
Jens Kubieziel -
Paul Syverson -
Roger Dingledine -
Shari Steele -
Vasilis