You seem to see only the repressive part of the moderation team.
Moderators have special authority; they are responsible for this forum. But so are you. With your help, moderators can be community facilitators, not just janitors or police.
I have accepted to get access to the moderation tools to continue what I was trying to do as a regular user: organize this forum to make the high quality content accessible. The cop part is just boring.
As I said somewhere else, my workflow using @parulin-mod is the following: open the account, check PMs, flags and take appropriate action if needed. I don’t review every post/topic. I hadn’t read that guide before I saw a flag using my mod account.
My original concerns remain without a proper answer. If we want to change the rules of this forum, it could be possible but it will require some kind of discussion.
What? This is literally the most minor thing and we are making an issue over this, why? I don’t understand how the title is misleading and I dont understand how it is not qubes related. Please point out if you think I am wrong.
I think the “awesome guides” coalition should simply understand that this is not Hyde Park or a place for CTA campaigns, followed by “oh you repressed me” drama. Good guides are very welcome but that doesn’t mean we should have “Awesome supre-duper cooking recipes for everyone” just because those can be stored in an AppVM.
What exactly is the problem I don’t understand, is it the title? Tell me one word that does not fit or does not fit the guide. Is it off topic? Why? It Is literally an optimization for ephemeral RAM-cheap overlay sessions for qubes apps,folders etc.
Please explain to me nicely what the problem is because so far I don’t get it. If a mod makes a mistake it should be pointed out.
I’d be so grateful if you could start with the first word (‘Awesome’). I’m just wondering whether it’s really necessary in this case, whether it’s a technical or informational necessity. I’m just wondering whether it has any purpose other than to give things a bit of a glow that needs to be proven first?
I would be so grateful again if you could be so kind to let me know where there is a “mistake” that a mod made.
So this whole thing is because of the word awesome? So what? This man wrote a community guide out of his own time with no economic incentive and you stand in judgement because he wrote “awesome”. That is utterly ridiculous and so over the top for no reason. You know a mod can make a mistake and then just continue this is not the end of the world I don’t know why there is a need to keep defending him
Unfortunately, that’s just the beginning. The image doesn’t include any credit information. And the direct connection to QubesOS is also unclear.
I don’t doubt the potential value of an article or guide or wiki either. I just have my doubts as to whether the author can determine that value from the outset (and, for the sake of inexperienced readers, should even attempt to do so). Some things have unintended side effects.
Would you - I ask you very kindly again - point out the “mistake” a mod here made?
You are deviating from the this is not qubes related to should it be done? First of all the image is self made as he said. Second how is the connection unclear did you even read the article? You did not give me any points as to why the article should be changed. The word awesome being the reason is just ridiculous. The mistake is over moderating everrything, which is well written and phrased what do you want a chatgpt title written with 3 words. Maybe we should rephrase it to a Microsoft executive meeting title “ Directory Overlay Configuration Reference Document”. Does the article solve a problem, does the article help the qubes community? These are the things you should be looking at but instead @OvalZero you are looking at unimportant words and discouraging other members.
I’m truly sorry, but initially the contributor posted a note about Unilicence at the bottom of their article, and the mod asked whether the image was included and where it came from. Isn’t that a valid question?
And the question of whether something is fundamentally related to QubesOS stems, in my opinion, not only from linguistic considerations but also from concrete security concerns.
That’s why a guide that I consider reliable always clearly states what the use case is, who the intended user group is, what needs to be taken into account or which features may be limited, whether system services could potentially be affected, what to watch out for in future updates, and so on.
Again - kindly asked - what mistake did a moderator make? “Over moderating everything” is a bit… vague?
I have a rule, never ever do a community guide or run any code outside isolated vms. Never run code inside dom0 but what does this have to do with anything, he is solving a problem, and most of all he did another community guide where he made qubes os amnestic, which I actually use on another device and is very very interesting and highly recommend. For another user this guide could be useful who are you to judge?? As was the guide for amnestic qubes to me. I think the moderator over did it and many agreed with me. I did not agree with putting emojis in the title because it was truly cluttered but even then it is his guide which he made as a contribution not as an exchange. Continuing this is meaningless let’s just accept that this is NOT necessary and let linuxuser in peace.
You kindly suggested that I was fixated on words. But a guide is, after all, made up of words. And for inexperienced users, those words potentially have broader relevance (though, of course, everyone can decide that for themselves).
Your basic assumption that the system is so amnesic should also be examined. Just because something says “RAM wipe” doesn’t necessarily mean it actually performs a “RAM wipe” (effectively) in the end and under all circumstances.
So again: In my opinion, the value of a post should not be determined before it has been reviewed. No one who is seriously interested in safety and security would want that. Anyone who lets that deter them seems to me more concerned with their own status than with the safety of all users. And maybe Hyde Park is… although, even there, not every audience applauds unreservedly.
So a mod (or any other user) who asks questions isn’t over-moderating; rather, they’re improving the quality and availability of solutions. Incidentally, I’d like to strongly object to the idea that I’m against any guide author. I just don’t get why people oppose mods for no good reason while thinking of ‘censorship’.
You are still continuing this, now you are just finding new random reasons to oppose me. The mod had asked three questions (title,photo,relevance) the following questions are not related to the mod. Also @parulin-mod this is not a personal attack, but just to not over do it. You and @OvalZero have helped me multiple times in the past, but I just find it ridiculous to make an issue about the title. Because the other issues don’t stand. It is clearly about the title. If it works it works, the community guide dev did his job, and it is up to the user to determine if they want it or not. As for if the amnestic guide does its job yes it does it probably has bugs and vulnerabilities but for my reason I still find it useful. Saying it could affect the security of qubes os, of course it will as will all other guides.
Nothing was deleted or hidden, which is why I consider the term ‘censorship’ inappropriate.
On the contrary, in my opinion, it poisons the atmosphere and blows something that ultimately amounts to quality control - and nothing else - into a ‘political issue.’
The request not to discourage a guide author applies equally to moderators. Both contribute to the community.
Thank you very much for the friendly conversation.
