On 03/25/2016 12:08 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> Added to my list.

Also: syntax coloring for D code. It would be rad. -- Andrei

I wasn't planning on replying to this thread, but I think we should all stop for a moment and marvel at the amazing power of this mailing list to derail discussions. We've gone from women in the community, to the merits of NNTP vs. web forums, to current politics. If the powers of this list could be properly harnessed, flame wars would become a thing of the past, buried and smothered out under pages and pages of digression. Even what is arguably the most inflammatory discussion topic in tech right now is no match for the power of forum.dlang.org. Let's all pat ourselves on the back for having discovered the perfect weapon to combat internet flame wars.

On 3/24/2016 9:08 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> I actually didn't expect that you'd be in favor of Markdown, since you were
> against even allowing users to view HTML message parts.

I changed my mind to be in favor of Markdown, but I still oppose viewing the HTML parts. For one thing, having pictures, javascript, remote content, etc., does not add value in a programming forum, it consumes bandwidth, and is a security risk.

Markdown should provide all we need. Andrei has suggested D code highlighting, which is a good idea.

On 3/24/2016 4:16 PM, tsbockman wrote:
>[...]

Maybe we should leave politics out of this forum. It adds no relevance to programming, generates lots of bad feeling, and there are certainly plenty of political threads on reddit for anyone inclined.

On Friday, 25 March 2016 at 04:12:10 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 03/25/2016 12:08 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>> Added to my list.
>
> Also: syntax coloring for D code. It would be rad. -- Andrei

I love rad :)

On Friday, 25 March 2016 at 04:52:09 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 3/24/2016 4:16 PM, tsbockman wrote:
>>[...]
>
> Maybe we should leave politics out of this forum. It adds no relevance to programming, generates lots of bad feeling, and there are certainly plenty of political threads on reddit for anyone inclined.

Fair enough. I would say this thread has been political from the beginning, though, long before anyone mentioned Donald Trump...

On Thursday, 24 March 2016 at 23:04:42 UTC, QAston wrote:
> If only one could somehow engineer societies (males? - that seems to be the problem) meeting your standards.

Well, online one can engineer societies, if one are willing to spend the investments, but men are not the problem. Women are just as dysfunctional as men are, and both men and women experience gender-related discrimination in different fields (custody cases come to mind).

I'll even say that the in-your-face bluntness-agression is preferably to silent aggression/freezing out, because bluntness can be addressed and corrected more easily. Hopefully we don't have a big freezing out problem (but how can you tell?). We do have the occasional bluntness problem.

But let me ask you this question instead: would you expect the average man to feel inclined to join an all-female online community? I wouldn't. Just turn the gender around and ask the same question again: would you expect the average woman to feel inclined to join an all-male online community?

Clearly, you need to think about how you grow your online community if you want to create openings either way.

On Friday, 25 March 2016 at 03:20:01 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> I'm pretty sure Qaston was being sarcastic.

Indeed I was. It was difficult to not mock contempt for lesser people in that post.

On Thursday, 24 March 2016 at 20:57:22 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> Maybe or maybe not, but meta discussions are important for changing norms within a forum. If a given tone means that some women hesitate to join in, it probably also means that a group of men also hestitate to join in. Adjusting the tone might mean that more people will participate which would be better for all.
[...]
> The thread itself strengthened Karabuta's core message, didn't it? :-)
>
> Unfortunately, I am not sure if there are anyone in the D community that would make a good objective moderator, so I am not sure exactly how it can be fixed other than these occasional "storming" threads that end with an appeal to self-moderation.
>
> I find the Donald Trump phenomena to be an unpleasant reminder that there are certain aspects of our male culture that we men need to address both in ourselves and in others. I somehow doubt that a woman could act the same way as Trump does and get a 40% approval rating for it.

I don't want to walk on eggshels. Incidents happen sometimes on this forum (as well as everywhere - we're just people) but they get resolved. The forum self-regulates because it's not yet a circle jerk, and people being critical of others is one of the reasons for that. Karabuta apparently can handle criticism - good for him - the more people like that the better.

It's funny how society "helps" women. Some crazy entitled women declare "manspreading" an issue. Good daddy - state - intervenes and bans sitting the wrong way [1]. It's not like women are adults and can ask a person to move, they're delicate flowers who need protection from state in cases of SLIGHTEST first world inconveniences. Entitlement intensifies - now cat-calling is a problem women can't deal with [2]. Now doctor can't tell a fat woman that her lifestyle is unhealthy - that's fat shaming [3]. Colleges are not really an example of intellectually healthy environment [4]. There will never be enough placating, but men need to step up!

Here's a crazy idea: women can do everything they want. They're adults. According to Ola women are better collaborators. So they're better capable of adapting to "male forums", that's what collaboration is about. I don't think they need strong male protective arm to handle internet. And they fart - apparently I need to keep reminding people about that.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/11643052/Manspreading-arrests-the-long-arm-of-the-law-just-invaded-our-personal-space.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/391430/why-cat-calling-really-problem-christine-sisto
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/fat-shaming/
http://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2015/11/25/from-megaphones-to-muzzles-free-speech-safe-spaces-and-college-campuses

On Thursday, 24 March 2016 at 23:16:05 UTC, tsbockman wrote:
> According to the national polls tracked by Real Clear Politics, Trump currently has about 43% of the *Republican* vote - which itself is only about 30% of the *national* vote, meaning that his real support is ~13%. (Most years, about 40% of the country refuses/chooses not to endorse either candidate in the general election for President.)

Ok, Trump is at 38% now vs Clinton  and at 37% vs Sanders so it seems like the exposure is having at least a noticeable negative effect... We'll see, the dynamics are interesting to watch.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-5565.html

On Friday, 25 March 2016 at 10:22:55 UTC, QAston wrote:
> adults. According to Ola women are better collaborators.

I've never said that. And that is not true as a general statement.