off-topic: bitcoin-forum...
9 messages, 19 to 20 Feb 2012. Started by Michael Gronager.
Michael Gronager (2), Harald Schilly (2), grarpamp (2), Daniel F (2), Wladimir J. van der Laan
I am trying to post on the bitcoin forums (bitcointalk.org), but I am only able to reply and post on some of the regional forums?!?!? On the bitcoin dev and alternative client forums I have no post / reply button...
I don't consider myself an IT illiterate, and I have even tried to create a new user to see if that would help, but no luck....
Can any of you please share with me the secret on how to post there ???
In the expectation of a embarrassingly simple answer...
Michael
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 17:38, Michael Gronager <gronager@ceptacle•com> wrote:
Quoted text (1 line)
> In the expectation of a embarrassingly simple answer...
you probably need to be whitelisted, but i'm not sure. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=15911.0
h
Thanks!
"required 5 posts and 4 hours"
Well, that is not so easy if you cannot post ;) I will apply for whitelisting - strange policy though...
/M
On 19/02/2012, at 17:42, Harald Schilly wrote:
Quoted text (7 lines)
> On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 17:38, Michael Gronager <gronager@ceptacle•com> wrote: >> In the expectation of a embarrassingly simple answer... > > you probably need to be whitelisted, but i'm not sure. > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=15911.0 > > h
Michael Gronager, PhD Director, Ceptacle Jens Juels Gade 33 2100 Copenhagen E Mobile: +45 31 45 14 01 E-mail: gronager@ceptacle•com Web: http://www.ceptacle.com/
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 17:45, Michael Grønager <gronager@ceptacle•com> wrote:
Quoted text (1 line)
> strange policy though...
well, spammers are everywhere :)
h
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Michael Grønager <gronager@ceptacle•com>wrote:
Quoted text (7 lines)
> Thanks! > > "required 5 posts and 4 hours" > > Well, that is not so easy if you cannot post ;) I will apply for > whitelisting - strange policy though... >
It was instated in times that the forums were much more busy. There were a lot of new people that trolled the forum with questions immediately, which were answered throughout the forum already. This policy forces people to hang around the newbie forums a bit before being able to post to the "full" forum. I'm not sure it's really needed anymore -- anyway, it used to be much more strict and you'll have no problems getting whitelisted.
Wladimir
Quoted text (1 line)
> I am trying to post on the bitcoin forums (bitcointalk.org)
I wish there were a bitcoin-user mailing list??? But the one on sourceforge is dead. Forums are too full of avatars, smilies, sigblocks and dead mass to be of much use. Not to mention when they vanish, any content dies with it instead of living on in various archives.
on 02/19/2012 04:32 PM grarpamp said the following:
Quoted text (6 lines)
>> I am trying to post on the bitcoin forums (bitcointalk.org) > I wish there were a bitcoin-user mailing list??? But the one on > sourceforge is dead. Forums are too full of avatars, smilies, > sigblocks and dead mass to be of much use. Not to mention > when they vanish, any content dies with it instead of living > on in various archives.
Some time ago i started a googlegroup mailing list, bitcoin-discussion. It's been pretty low-volume... but it's something. :)
http://groups.google.com/group/bitcoin-discussion
or we could try to revive the bitcoin-list ml on sf.
Quoted text (3 lines)
> Some time ago i started a googlegroup mailing list, bitcoin-discussion. > It's been pretty low-volume... but it's something. :) > http://groups.google.com/group/bitcoin-discussion
Unfortunately it appears to be just as dead as the one on sourceforge.
Quoted text (1 line)
> or we could try to revive the bitcoin-list ml on sf.
Well there's a couple things I see...
1) Yes, IMO, a real mailing list for users needs to exist. Among the prior reasons... lists tend to house a more technical crowd than forums which are magnets for initiates. 2) There was originally one client. Now there are many, all adherant to the same bitcoin spec. So while: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net represents the dev community for the original client, it may not, or won't be, for any other client. And as: bitcoin-list@lists•sourceforge•net was for, and is administratively tied to, the original client... it may not be the place, or a welcome one, to hold talk of all the adherant clients. 3) The sourceforge list browsing interface is ridiculously lame and overweight, and it doesn't appear to be setting a '^Reply-to: ' header which is bad. Googlegroups would be an ok site I suppose. And a pure MailMan interface would be even better and more customarily accepted.
So for the user list, I'd suggest: 1) Search a bit to make sure there's not already a busy list out there somewhere. Check the list aggregator sites like markmail, gmane, etc too. 2) Charter it as bitcoin protocol, client agnostic. 3) Find an impartial administrative and robust home for the list with browsable, searchable and hopefully downloadable archives. 4) Make the announcement to other known client lists/forums. 5) Close any relevant old lists. 6) Promote via similar announcement from time to time.
http://groups.google.com/group/bitcoin-discussion/about Description: A place for discussion related to bitcoin.
Is this sufficient charter to go with? Is the creator/maintainer known impartial? What happens to ongoing list operations when said people vanish? It is presumed googlegroups itself is robust.
on 02/19/2012 07:13 PM grarpamp said the following:
Quoted text (6 lines)
>> Some time ago i started a googlegroup mailing list, bitcoin-discussion. >> It's been pretty low-volume... but it's something. :) >> http://groups.google.com/group/bitcoin-discussion > > Unfortunately it appears to be just as dead as the one > on sourceforge.
That's exactly what i said above, in a more euphemistic fashion :D
Quoted text (6 lines)
> Well there's a couple things I see... > > 1) Yes, IMO, a real mailing list for users needs to exist. > Among the prior reasons... lists tend to house a more > technical crowd than forums which are magnets for > initiates.
indeed.
Quoted text (10 lines)
> 2) There was originally one client. Now there are many, > all adherant to the same bitcoin spec. So while: > bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net > represents the dev community for the original client, > it may not, or won't be, for any other client. > And as: > bitcoin-list@lists•sourceforge•net > was for, and is administratively tied to, the original client... > it may not be the place, or a welcome one, to hold talk of all > the adherant clients.
i'm sure that with the list being unused, we could change the charter and do whatever with it, and the people who matter probably won't object.
Quoted text (5 lines)
> 3) The sourceforge list browsing interface is ridiculously > lame and overweight, and it doesn't appear to be setting > a '^Reply-to: ' header which is bad. Googlegroups would > be an ok site I suppose. And a pure MailMan interface would > be even better and more customarily accepted.
Indeed, good points on all counts.
Quoted text (10 lines)
> So for the user list, I'd suggest: > 1) Search a bit to make sure there's not already a busy list > out there somewhere. Check the list aggregator sites > like markmail, gmane, etc too. > 2) Charter it as bitcoin protocol, client agnostic. > 3) Find an impartial administrative and robust home for the list > with browsable, searchable and hopefully downloadable archives. > 4) Make the announcement to other known client lists/forums. > 5) Close any relevant old lists. > 6) Promote via similar announcement from time to time.
good points. re 1), i'm pretty sure that -dev is the most active bitcoin-related public mailing list. things may have changed in the past half-year, but it seems unlikely.
Quoted text (6 lines)
> http://groups.google.com/group/bitcoin-discussion/about > Description: A place for discussion related to bitcoin. > > Is this sufficient charter to go with? Is the creator/maintainer > known impartial? What happens to ongoing list operations when > said people vanish? It is presumed googlegroups itself is robust.
charter can be changed if needed. creator/maintainer, that being me, is generally known to be a pretty decent guy :). i'm not attached to this particular list though, but whatever happens, i'd hope that there will be more people willing to share administrative duties. not sure if googlegroups is the best interface, if we can find some good free host with mailman, downloadable archives, the works, that may be preferable. i started that group on gg simply because it was free and easily available and easy to set up.