Yeah, I think on some sites the idea is for the Lounge to be a social / community-building benefit for high rep users, but we’re not using it that way anyway.
Another possibility would be to take the existing Moderator Discussion here and extend that to TL3 and TL4 users. Anything that’s really sensitive we have other channels to discuss anyway.
If I look at the posts that are in the current lounge on ask, I actually think many of them belong in the public forum.
The exception being those that address dealing with difficult user situations which to your point could be merged with some kind of private moderation forum.
The idea of having a lounge to just hang out and discuss things doesn’t seem to happen on ask. I think it would be great to have something like that, but currently it isn’t that on ask.
I am not sure if we need that. For “smaller” group discussions and socializing we have matrix, irc, discussion-threads and more. I think community-building takes place at other areas in Fedora, and usually at those areas that are open for everyone. When it comes to socializing, we have the Watercooler at discussion.fp, Social Hour, the channel and other activities/possibilities that are mostly unrestricted.
Also, my perception has always been that it is “widely expected” and intended to use the lounge as little as possible because we want to be an open community.
So imho, the need for the lounge is limited to handling problem cases, and this would be also satisfied by …
So, that would be an alternative that can fulfill the role. And it would clearly make the point that socializing is open at Fedora (if this is desired).
Why shall we restrict that? We have so many types of channels where people can openly socialize. I think outside of ask.fp ask-topics, we usually do not need to worry about “one day” users who are gone once their question is answered. So socializing among people with the goal of also getting to know each other better over time works imho.
However, how about a dedicated channel in Matrix or so for the ask.fp SIG? So, one that is explicitly not for answering questions, which (in my experience) limits the participants to the “committed” people. So just like the lounge but open? Like the Docs channel or so.
We could even have a whole “Ask Fedora” sub-space in matrix, with sections for different broad topics and an off topic area. But I’ll let someone else worry about that 
It does look like the watercooler is basically the same thing.
What I have seen on other forums is that people are willing to talk more freely knowing the level of inspection on everything written is lower. When a topic is in the public forum, it gets picked up by every search engine on the planet.
That being said, I wasn’t really pushing for it, just noticing that the lounge definitely isn’t that on ask.
Absolutely. But the version open to the whole community.
Indeed, a good point. However, a Matrix channel could at least partly solve the issue because contents can be made not public on search engines or so but to become only visible to registered & logged in Fedorians. Just the number of Fedorians with access would be higher compared to the lounge.
The interesting thing is, many people aren’t comfortable with that type of a platform and will never participate. It is a very different thing to a forum.
It also depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Getting people active and socializing on a forum tends to increase participation on other topics as well. People on ask often can’t get questions answered because there are a limited number of people there who are actively helping and they don’t know everything about everything. Increasing socialization is one way to start to alter that. Of course, it isn’t the only way.
I love the idea of a sub-space in matrix…
welcome back to the point why ask fedora uses the lounge category?:
why ask fedora uses the staff category?
Regards.,
Regards.,
I think it’s sometimes useful to have a space for moderators to discuss moderation related things in private, but otherwise I think defaulting to open is the best policy.
If there is a social thing, I’d prefer it be open to any interested folks…
A few things to think about with regard to “yet another channel”, I walk customers through this sort of thing in my day job:
If the team has (based on some consensus) good answers for those four questions, it might be a good idea. If the team can’t come to a consensus on the answers to those questions then it may not be a great idea.
I didn’t include “Is the intent of this channel implemented by something that already exists?” because, while there may be some good conversations around that topic, it’s easy for a conflict to arise that can derail the (arguably) more important questions already listed.
I personally have no opinion on the topic either way. I just wanted to provide some food for thought to assist in facilitating the discussion. The team will decide what to do as appropriate, as well it should. 
Okay, so, let’s do a poll! As always, this is a straw poll, not a binding vote.
0 voters
Note that this wouldn’t replace code of conduct tickets for more serious things. In fact, sometimes the consensus might be: oooh, this should be a code of conduct ticket.
If we go with a category, I am thinking I will set it up to auto-delete posts after, say, six months. We don’t need it to be an gossip repository. (Note that admins and mods can see deleted posts.) This doesn’t prevent screenshots or whatever, but just makes it less likely that a good-faith discussion about someone’s post causes hurt feelings later when that person hits TL3
I don’t know of a way to do a similar thing with Matrix, although TBH self-destructing history would be a useful feature.
I’ve got a comment here, remeber TL3 $USER is a in/out person depends in their activities, is not a long-term $USER like TL4, maybe a Lounge for TL3???
We discuss in Longue promotion to be a TL4 from TL3
We discuss in Staff manage SPAM $USER, TL4, Admin, Moderators
between others activities…
Regards.,
I guess the poll is not related to a potential Matrix channel? So, the “Fedora Chat channel” refers to a lounge in the merged discourse? Or do you mean a Matrix channel that is not public?
Oh, hmmm, I forgot about the TL3 → TL4 promotion process. On Ask, that process is: TL3 users who want to go to the next level (um, literally in this case) can post in the Lounge (which is available to TL3+), and if there are no objections in two weeks, we do it.
I think it should be okay for TL3 users to have access to the restricted-access room — but this is is one of the reasons I was thought of having posts self-delete. If they do have access, we could just continue the promotion process there.
Oh, sorry: “Fedora Chat” is Matrix — https://chat.fedoraproject.org/
Thanks 
I am a bit confused because
So, we had three concepts if I understood it correctly:
Personally, I am fine with both of the last two: as long as there is any channel where TL3/TL4/mods can privately exchange and discuss issues, it is not relevant for me if I am in the moderator area or in a lounge category.
When it comes to a chat, I would prefer to not always have to log into two services to start a discussion about an issue on any topic. I would prefer one of the other two possibilities, which are integrated into discourse (this is also an advantage when we use citations and such). Also, I think it will be hard to organize this in a Matrix channel: we have no dedicated topics/threads for an issue in a Matrix channel, no categorization. A matrix channel only sorts by time in the end.
So, I am for a Matrix channel for the ask.fp SIG, but not private but open for every Fedora/Matrix account, as elaborated at the bottom of 7 and 10. Based upon what I see in other channels, the channels will not attract the “one-day members” anyway but more the long-term contributors, and channels are not indexed. So, the Matrix channel would be for a different purpose in this case.
I am skeptic about explicitly foster non-moderation discussions in closed/private areas. But I will not object if others like that. I guess our community has no tendency to develop towards decision making in such closed areas, and in the past we could rely that this does not happen. If people want to have a “hang out” discussion in a closed lounge or such, it doesn’t hurt.
I’m not sure how to put this in the poll 
I am against a strict separation for TL3/4 in the Lounge. It not hurts if there are TL4+ present to just keep an eye on it. Just in case for strong opinions. It is better to remember someone to keep calm and be civilized than to escalate a problem who gets hot in a hideaway section of a ask/discussion forum.
I don’t fully understand the comment. You mean you are against having a separated mods-only (which is “site admin”-only if I understood @mattdm correctly) area next to the lounge for TL3/TL4? So you are for having no separated lounge and instead add TL3 and TL4 to the current mods-only area? Sorry, I just want to avoid misinterpreting your comment
I’m a moderator here, and help out at ask. I didn’t know there was a lounge for TL3/TL4+ Mod’s to hang out and bash on users, I won’t be participating thanks.
No one is bashing. But we had already issues when users became offensive or persistently kept violating rules. We used the lounge to discuss what is the least invasive way to tackle this behavior and how to avoid escalations, which is not always as easy and clear as it sounds. Also, there are situations where it is not fully clear if something (that potentially regularly reappears) is a violation or not. It is then a good thing to ask/discuss if this is the case or not. Especially with regard to potential escalations and/or misinterpretations by other members in response. Don’t forget losses in translation (e.g., is this offensive? Can it be interpreted that way?), which can also affect moderators when interpreting posts. Another example is to discuss if we have to split a topic or not, and when this makes sense - this is also not always that clear. Additionally, it is an important thing that, especially new TL3/TL4 (and ALL TL3/TL4 in situations that have not occurred before), can ask before they apply any action: this also facilitates common & static behavior of the moderators, avoiding inconsistent moderation actions.
I do refer to ask.fedora. I meant that the Lounge there is not just for TL3 + TL4 right ?
If it should give a separate group for TL 3 and 4 topics after merge, it should not be restricted on this two groups. It should also have members with TL 4+ to supervise and interfere if necessary.