www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - The D AGM

reply Johan Coder <johan coder.org> writes:
Hello D community,


I use D professionally from some months back.  Posting as 
anonymous to avoid opening debates at work.  I come from a 
Scala-Java-Python background and in many ways D is a breathe of 
fresh air.  True in others is not which is expected.  Also 
started following the github stream of work because we are 
interested in a few bugfixes in language-and phobos-space.  Not 
much on forums but have been active in other languages similar 
forums and on occasions in their official meetups.

I looked at the conference and AGM on video because it is related 
to my day job.  I have had hopes about the AGM but it was a bit 
disappointing due to a few things.  Feed back inspired from 
similar meetings I saw:

- Formalism is very important and it is great that Walter and 
Andrei insist on it.  Python PEP are very informal and the 
process is argumentative.  Java and Scala are better and should 
give inspiration.

- The DIPS discussion was too long.  DIP 1000 needs more 
documentation but that should be one minute decision.  DIP 1015 
is not very important, why discuss it again? All languages have 
things like this and I like D bool more than verbose Java 
boolean.  But it does not matter anyway!  DIP 1016 was the 
interesting but was not discussed.  No discussion about the DIPS 
pipeline which is the most important!

- The vision part was also too long and too few clear conclusion. 
  A lot of important things not discussed.

- Form of meeting was.....  much to be improved.  Anyone could 
hold the microphone for any time and say whatever.  No filter and 
honest some people said too little in too much (not sure how to 
express).  Many words with little content.  The person at 
https://youtu.be/cpTAtiboIDs?t=4462 loves to hear himself.  There 
should be a limit.  In such meetings the moderator needs to 
control it, and they did a poor job.

- Meeting should not be with time limit.  All items must be 
discussed and it ends when topics end.  Why only two hours for so 
many items?

- Items came in random order.  If there is a time limit most 
important topics must come first.  Most meeting was on minor 
things!

- Speaking of meeting moderator, who was that? Mike, Ethan or 
Nick? The moderator/s did a bad job at making the meeting work.  
One problem is Nick was not organized and difficult to understand 
even.  More complicated is I don't understand Nicks role.  Was he 
chosen by the D foundation?  If so I suggest he is replaced for 
next year.  If not I did not see a process of election by the 
community.  Does it means he appointed himself?  Anyone can do 
that by collecting a random list of popular topics and saying he 
will hold an AGM?  That would be an even bigger problem.

This is my list.  It is in random order too!  Most important:  
make time for all topics.  Discuss important topics first.  
Moderation should limit time with the microphone and move the 
meeting forward such that everything is discussed.
May 12 2019
next sibling parent reply FeepingCreature <feepingcreature gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 05:27:00 UTC, Johan Coder wrote:

 - Form of meeting was.....  much to be improved.  Anyone could 
 hold the microphone for any time and say whatever. No filter 
 and honest some people said too little in too much (not sure 
 how to express).  Many words with little content.  The person 
 at https://youtu.be/cpTAtiboIDs?t=4462 loves to hear himself.


Please don't call people out like this. It's rude, offputting, 
and in any case you are not the moderator.

Anyways, I have no idea what you want the organizers to do about 
it. Make visitors preregister their questions?


 - Speaking of meeting moderator, who was that? Mike, Ethan or 
 Nick? The moderator/s did a bad job at making the meeting work.
  One problem is Nick was not organized and difficult to 
 understand even.  More complicated is I don't understand Nicks 
 role.  Was he chosen by the D foundation?  If so I suggest he 
 is replaced for next year.  If not I did not see a process of 
 election by the community.  Does it means he appointed himself?
  Anyone can do that by collecting a random list of popular 
 topics and saying he will hold an AGM?  That would be an even 
 bigger problem.


History isn't made by those most qualified, but by those who 
bothered to show up.

That said, yes, absolutely anyone can collect a random list of 
popular topics and say they will hold an AGM. Of course, the 
problem is getting people to pay attention...
May 13 2019
parent reply Johan Coder <johan coder.org> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 07:34:02 UTC, FeepingCreature wrote:

 On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 05:27:00 UTC, Johan Coder wrote:

 - Form of meeting was.....  much to be improved.  Anyone could 
 hold the microphone for any time and say whatever. No filter 
 and honest some people said too little in too much (not sure 
 how to express).  Many words with little content.  The person 
 at https://youtu.be/cpTAtiboIDs?t=4462 loves to hear himself.


 Please don't call people out like this. It's rude, offputting, 
 and in any case you are not the moderator.


He spoke in a public meeting with importance to my job. He chose 
it. Not obligated. Spoke too much and took time from important 
topics. Yes I am not the moderator but he or she should have tell 
him to make it short.


 Anyways, I have no idea what you want the organizers to do 
 about it. Make visitors preregister their questions?


A good moderator can interrupt some one who speaks too much 
repeatedly and does not say insightful things.

Please do not make it my fault that some guy took over the AGM.
May 13 2019
parent reply Guillaume Piolat <first.last gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 18:08:26 UTC, Johan Coder wrote:

 He spoke in a public meeting with importance to my job. He 
 chose it. Not obligated. Spoke too much and took time from 
 important topics. Yes I am not the moderator but he or she 
 should have tell him to make it short.


Thank you for your insights in this discussion.
It seems one lesson to take from this is that anonimity in these 
forums should not be an option.
May 13 2019
parent reply James Thompson <james inkblotsoftware.com> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 21:43:36 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:

 It seems one lesson to take from this is that anonimity in 
 these forums should not be an option.


It would be interesting to try this for a couple of weeks and see 
how the overall tone changes.

If we're supposed to be following 'professional conduct' here it 
doesn't seem too strange to have our actions affect our 
professional reputations.
May 13 2019
next sibling parent reply Johan Coder <johan coder.org> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 22:24:53 UTC, James Thompson wrote:

 On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 21:43:36 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:

 It seems one lesson to take from this is that anonimity in 
 these forums should not be an option.


 It would be interesting to try this for a couple of weeks and 
 see how the overall tone changes.

 If we're supposed to be following 'professional conduct' here 
 it doesn't seem too strange to have our actions affect our 
 professional reputations.


I agree. If not even required I will post as myself if most other 
people do so.
May 13 2019
parent Bastiaan Veelo <Bastiaan Veelo.net> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 23:48:08 UTC, Johan Coder wrote:

 On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 22:24:53 UTC, James Thompson wrote:

 On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 21:43:36 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:

 It seems one lesson to take from this is that anonimity in 
 these forums should not be an option.


 It would be interesting to try this for a couple of weeks and 
 see how the overall tone changes.

 If we're supposed to be following 'professional conduct' here 
 it doesn't seem too strange to have our actions affect our 
 professional reputations.


 I agree. If not even required I will post as myself if most 
 other people do so.


I highly recommend not to post anonymously. I value the voice of 
people way more if they don’t hide behind a pseudonym. If you 
feel you need to be anonymous to protect your position at work 
then I pity you, as I wouldn’t be working at a place like that. I 
think everybody benefits when people post under their real name. 
Not the least the poster, as every valuable contribution to a 
discussion will add to her/his professional credibility.

Bastiaan.
May 14 2019
prev sibling parent Kagamin <spam here.lot> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 22:24:53 UTC, James Thompson wrote:

 If we're supposed to be following 'professional conduct' here 
 it doesn't seem too strange to have our actions affect our 
 professional reputations.


Ad hominem isn't and never was professional conduct and can't 
hope to be.
May 14 2019
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Johannes Loher <johannesloher fg4f.de> writes:
Am 13.05.19 um 07:27 schrieb Johan Coder:

 Hello D community,
 
 
 I use D professionally from some months back.  Posting as anonymous to
 avoid opening debates at work.  I come from a Scala-Java-Python
 background and in many ways D is a breathe of fresh air.  True in others
 is not which is expected.  Also started following the github stream of
 work because we are interested in a few bugfixes in language-and
 phobos-space.  Not much on forums but have been active in other
 languages similar forums and on occasions in their official meetups.
 
 I looked at the conference and AGM on video because it is related to my
 day job.  I have had hopes about the AGM but it was a bit disappointing
 due to a few things.  Feed back inspired from similar meetings I saw:
 
 - Formalism is very important and it is great that Walter and Andrei
 insist on it.  Python PEP are very informal and the process is
 argumentative.  Java and Scala are better and should give inspiration.
 
 - The DIPS discussion was too long.  DIP 1000 needs more documentation
 but that should be one minute decision.  DIP 1015 is not very important,
 why discuss it again? All languages have things like this and I like D
 bool more than verbose Java boolean.  But it does not matter anyway! 
 DIP 1016 was the interesting but was not discussed.  No discussion about
 the DIPS pipeline which is the most important!
 
 - The vision part was also too long and too few clear conclusion.  A lot
 of important things not discussed.
 
 - Form of meeting was.....  much to be improved.  Anyone could hold the
 microphone for any time and say whatever.  No filter and honest some
 people said too little in too much (not sure how to express).  Many
 words with little content.  The person at
 https://youtu.be/cpTAtiboIDs?t=4462 loves to hear himself.  There should
 be a limit.  In such meetings the moderator needs to control it, and
 they did a poor job.
 
 - Meeting should not be with time limit.  All items must be discussed
 and it ends when topics end.  Why only two hours for so many items?
 
 - Items came in random order.  If there is a time limit most important
 topics must come first.  Most meeting was on minor things!
 
 - Speaking of meeting moderator, who was that? Mike, Ethan or Nick? The
 moderator/s did a bad job at making the meeting work.  One problem is
 Nick was not organized and difficult to understand even.  More
 complicated is I don't understand Nicks role.  Was he chosen by the D
 foundation?  If so I suggest he is replaced for next year.  If not I did
 not see a process of election by the community.  Does it means he
 appointed himself?  Anyone can do that by collecting a random list of
 popular topics and saying he will hold an AGM?  That would be an even
 bigger problem.
 
 This is my list.  It is in random order too!  Most important:  make time
 for all topics.  Discuss important topics first.  Moderation should
 limit time with the microphone and move the meeting forward such that
 everything is discussed.


I mostly agree with this. To be honest, when I first saw the agenda for
the AGM and the time that was allocated to the AGM, I was in shock: It
is simply too much to discuss in that amount of time. It actually turned
out much better than I expected but we still had to cut the complete
list of genral topics due to lack of time.

I think the problems with the meeting boil down to a few points:

1. Unclear purpose

At least from what I understand, the meeting did not serve any specific
purpose and it did also not set any clear expectations. Is this meeting
just an extended form of the "Ask us Anything!" panel, just with a
predefined agenda? Or is something where we can actually try to make
some decisions or at least find some sort of conensus on some things?

2. Missing form

There was absolutley no form to the meeting. As the previous poster also
mentioned, it was basically "go through a list of points and whoever
wants to say something to a point just does so". This sort of meeting
form is _very_ ineffective and inefficient. The previous poster made
some good suggestions already but there is a lot more that can be improved.

3. Missing structure in the agenda

This also has already been said by the previous poster. Basically it was
just a list of points grouped more or less randomly. I believe this is
due to how the list was assembled (Nicholas just included all issues
with D, the D community and the process of how D is developed he could
think of and also all pointer that others suggested to him should be
added to the list) but also due to the nature of the list: The topics
are quite diverse, e.g. there were language related issues but also
process related issues. It is non trivial how to even create a
meaningful structure to _all_ of these topics and I believe that simply
not enough time has been spent on that.

4. Unclear roles

This has also been said already in some form. Who is the moderator (and
relating back to my seond point, what is the job of the moderator)? What
are Walter's and Andrei's (well, from now on Atila's instead) role in
the meeting. What was Nicholas' role? What about the comminity's? I
believe one problem in particular with moderation was that the moderator
should be as neutral as possible and focus on the process of the meeting
instead of making his own point. Mike and Ethan tried this and did a
fairly good job, but you noticed that Nicholas struggled with that
because he feels strongly about many of the topics. This is not meant as
an offense at all, it just means that Nicholas was not qualified to be a
moderator for this meeting.
Also why did we not have any official recorder? I know that the meeting
was recorded on video but for things like this it is important to
document the _results_ in a way that can easily be acted upon and that
is much easier with a written record. Now we basically only have the
notes that some of us took...



Going forward, if we are to repeat the AGM next year, I believe we need
to address these issues. In particular, we need to:

1. Define a clear purpose for the AGM.
2. Define a clear form / structure for the meeting.
3. Create a much better structured agenda (this could also mean that we
simply need to explicitly exclude some of the points).
4. Define who is responsible for what in the AGM.

This list is ordered by how important I believe the points to be but I
firmly believe that we need to address all of them.

I hope this helps in making the AGM a bigger success next time.

Best regards,
Johannes
May 13 2019
next sibling parent Kagamin <spam here.lot> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 07:34:45 UTC, Johannes Loher wrote:

 1. Define a clear purpose for the AGM.


IIRC it was said before that conferences are beer parties with a 
hope they will understand something from body language what they 
couldn't say in text.
May 13 2019
prev sibling parent reply Bastiaan Veelo <Bastiaan Veelo.net> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 07:34:45 UTC, Johannes Loher wrote:
[...]

 Going forward, if we are to repeat the AGM next year, I believe 
 we need to address these issues. In particular, we need to:

 1. Define a clear purpose for the AGM.
 2. Define a clear form / structure for the meeting.
 3. Create a much better structured agenda (this could also mean 
 that we
 simply need to explicitly exclude some of the points).
 4. Define who is responsible for what in the AGM.

 This list is ordered by how important I believe the points to 
 be but I firmly believe that we need to address all of them.

 I hope this helps in making the AGM a bigger success next time.

 Best regards,
 Johannes


The vision documents have not been working very well. The vision 
was good, but they were not a very good indication of where the 
language is going and what is being worked on and how. One 
purpose of the AGM is that its records (I believe that Mike will 
work on those) are hoped to replace the vision documents as a 
more accurate and useful indication of where D is going, what its 
vitality is etc. As this was the first AGM in this form, I don't 
find it surprising that there are things to improve upon. I think 
it worked out pretty well, and want to thank Nicholas for his 
initiative. I think having a public AGM helps a lot to reach a 
more harmonious and unified working community. Otherwise these 
topics are discussed/complained about in the corridors within 
their respective bubbles where they don't achieve much. To all 
those criticising the agenda: it has been out there for comments 
for a long time, but I dont think Nicholas has received much 
feedback.

Bastiaan.
May 13 2019
parent reply Robert Schadek <rschadek symmetryinvestments.com> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 09:11:51 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:

 The vision documents have not been working very well. The 
 vision was good, but they were not a very good indication of 
 where the language is going and what is being worked on and 
 how. One purpose of the AGM is that its records (I believe that 
 Mike will work on those) are hoped to replace the vision 
 documents as a more accurate and useful indication of where D 
 is going, what its vitality is etc. As this was the first AGM 
 in this form, I don't find it surprising that there are things 
 to improve upon. I think it worked out pretty well, and want to 
 thank Nicholas for his initiative. I think having a public AGM 
 helps a lot to reach a more harmonious and unified working 
 community. Otherwise these topics are discussed/complained 
 about in the corridors within their respective bubbles where 
 they don't achieve much. To all those criticising the agenda: 
 it has been out there for comments for a long time, but I dont 
 think Nicholas has received much feedback.

 Bastiaan.


A couple of started to move the vision document into the issue 
tracker of this
https://github.com/dlang/projects github project. We also created 
a couple of major milestones, individual issues should be 
associated with.

The idea here is that, we use the same tools we manage 
programming languages with for the english language.
If you think about it, what is a vision document. I would say it 
is a program written in a very ambiguous programming language. So 
why not use the same tool we all already know?

Next years AGM agenda will then be trivial to prepare.
May 13 2019
parent Johan Coder <johan coder.org> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 10:02:16 UTC, Robert Schadek wrote:

 On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 09:11:51 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:

 The vision documents have not been working very well. The 
 vision was good, but they were not a very good indication of 
 where the language is going and what is being worked on and 
 how. One purpose of the AGM is that its records (I believe 
 that Mike will work on those) are hoped to replace the vision 
 documents as a more accurate and useful indication of where D 
 is going, what its vitality is etc. As this was the first AGM 
 in this form, I don't find it surprising that there are things 
 to improve upon. I think it worked out pretty well, and want 
 to thank Nicholas for his initiative. I think having a public 
 AGM helps a lot to reach a more harmonious and unified working 
 community. Otherwise these topics are discussed/complained 
 about in the corridors within their respective bubbles where 
 they don't achieve much. To all those criticising the agenda: 
 it has been out there for comments for a long time, but I dont 
 think Nicholas has received much feedback.

 Bastiaan.


 A couple of started to move the vision document into the issue 
 tracker of this
 https://github.com/dlang/projects github project. We also 
 created a couple of major milestones, individual issues should 
 be associated with.

 The idea here is that, we use the same tools we manage 
 programming languages with for the english language.
 If you think about it, what is a vision document. I would say 
 it is a program written in a very ambiguous programming 
 language. So why not use the same tool we all already know?

 Next years AGM agenda will then be trivial to prepare.


Very good idea, thank you.
May 13 2019
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Nicholas Wilson <iamthewilsonator hotmail.com> writes:
I'm going to preface this by saying that I have/had no experience 
running an AGM and that there were a lot of topics

On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 05:27:00 UTC, Johan Coder wrote:

 - The DIPS discussion was too long.  DIP 1000 needs more 
 documentation but that should be one minute decision.


The problem was not that dip1000 was under-documented it was the 
process by which it happened, specifically on the reviewing side 
where there is no document to refer to what it is supposed to be 
doing.


 DIP 1015 is not very important, why discuss it again? All 
 languages have things like this and I like D bool more than 
 verbose Java boolean.


Because the entire community though that the decision and the 
chain of reasoning was... bad, to put it mildly, and we need a 
process in place for dealing with such an outcome.


 But it does not matter anyway!  DIP 1016 was the interesting 
 but was not discussed.


DIP 1016 was discussed a lot at the conference so there was less 
need to cover it in as much depth.


 No discussion about the DIPS pipeline which is the most 
 important!


I'm pretty sure that was discussed.


 In such meetings the moderator needs to control it, and they 
 did a poor job.


perhaps, again, first time doing it. The items were ordered by 
priority, so not so bad, but I take you point.


 - Meeting should not be with time limit.  All items must be 
 discussed and it ends when topics end.  Why only two hours for 
 so many items?


Alas, it was all we had. I originally wanted to split it over 
where the "Ask Us Anything" slot ended up and the Saturday 
morning, because I think that that is not a particularly useful 
session (and they serve similar roles), but apparently tradition 
demands that session. Though it will be interesting to see if it 
continues with Atila at the helm.


 - Items came in random order. If there is a time limit most 
 important topics must come first.


Again it was ordered by priority.


 Most meeting was on minor things!


I don't think that was the case. Keep in mind that other things 
were discussed throughout the conference.


 - Speaking of meeting moderator, who was that? Mike, Ethan or 
 Nick? The moderator/s did a bad job at making the meeting work.
  One problem is Nick was not organized and difficult to 
 understand even.  More complicated is I don't understand Nicks 
 role.


I wrote the agenda.


 Was he chosen by the D foundation?  [Did] he appointed himself?
  Anyone can do that by collecting a random list of popular 
 topics and saying he will hold an AGM?


Sort of, I submitted it as a DConf proposal. It was accepted.


 That would be an even bigger problem.


The fact that we had one is an achievement. I don't think it 
would have happened otherwise.


 If so I suggest he is replaced for next year.


Why, are you volunteering?


 This is my list.  It is in random order too!  Most important:  
 make time for all topics.  Discuss important topics first.  
 Moderation should limit time with the microphone and move the 
 meeting forward such that everything is discussed.


Noted.
May 13 2019
next sibling parent reply rikki cattermole <rikki cattermole.co.nz> writes:
I just want to say thanks, I think that the AGM was a success.
A lot more was done and solved than I was expecting.
May 13 2019
parent Johan Coder <johan coder.org> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 12:11:41 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:

 I just want to say thanks, I think that the AGM was a success.
 A lot more was done and solved than I was expecting.


I am glad you gained from it. Do you have (or if not maybe there 
is somewhere) a list with high level problems solved?
May 13 2019
prev sibling parent reply Johan Coder <johan coder.org> writes:
 DIP 1015 is not very important, why discuss it again? All 
 languages have things like this and I like D bool more than 
 verbose Java boolean.


 Because the entire community though that the decision and the 
 chain of reasoning was... bad, to put it mildly, and we need a 
 process in place for dealing with such an outcome.


I read on the forum more about it. Me and my three friends do not 
mean the entire community.


 No discussion about the DIPS pipeline which is the most 
 important!


 I'm pretty sure that was discussed.


There is the video at 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpTAtiboIDs. Where?
May 13 2019
parent reply Seb <seb wilzba.ch> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 18:04:07 UTC, Johan Coder wrote:

 No discussion about the DIPS pipeline which is the most 
 important!


 I'm pretty sure that was discussed.


 There is the video at 
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpTAtiboIDs. Where?


I highly recommend joining DConf next year yourself in person as 
the best part of DConf are the offline discussions.

Anyhow, the change of the DIP process was partially announced 
here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpTAtiboIDs&t=3015s

(the upcoming change of leadership will affect the DIP process).
May 13 2019
parent Martin Tschierschke <mt smartdolphin.de> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 21:03:37 UTC, Seb wrote:

 On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 18:04:07 UTC, Johan Coder wrote:

 No discussion about the DIPS pipeline which is the most 
 important!


 I'm pretty sure that was discussed.


 There is the video at 
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpTAtiboIDs. Where?


 I highly recommend joining DConf next year yourself in person 
 as the best part of DConf are the offline discussions.

 Anyhow, the change of the DIP process was partially announced 
 here:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpTAtiboIDs&t=3015s

 (the upcoming change of leadership will affect the DIP process).


I was not sure at which point I should add my comment about the 
AGM video.
I would like to ask everybody, who has been in the room, to watch 
the video and please tell
me if my impression is wrong, that the AGM in total _seams_ to be 
a very poorly prepared event.

For me it was not an advertisement for Dlang.

But, being the first time held, it now gives a lot of room for 
improvement. :-)
May 14 2019
prev sibling next sibling parent reply matheus <matheus gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 05:27:00 UTC, Johan Coder wrote:

 I use D professionally from some months back.  Posting as 
 anonymous to avoid opening debates at work.


What?


 - Speaking of meeting moderator, who was that? Mike, Ethan or 
 Nick? The moderator/s did a bad job at making the meeting work.
  One problem is Nick was not organized and difficult to 
 understand even.


So you decided to go anonymous but on the other hand you expose 
people's name and pointing their (According your opinion) 
mistakes.

I think this is rude and shameful.

Matheus.
May 13 2019
parent Johan Coder <johan coder.org> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 13:27:51 UTC, matheus wrote:

 On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 05:27:00 UTC, Johan Coder wrote:

 I use D professionally from some months back.  Posting as 
 anonymous to avoid opening debates at work.


 What?


 - Speaking of meeting moderator, who was that? Mike, Ethan or 
 Nick? The moderator/s did a bad job at making the meeting work.
  One problem is Nick was not organized and difficult to 
 understand even.


 So you decided to go anonymous but on the other hand you expose 
 people's name and pointing their (According your opinion) 
 mistakes.


This is not exposing. He was out there with known name. Anonymous 
people criticized others all the time. Like Walter or Andrei.


 I think this is rude and shameful.


I think this is clueless.
May 13 2019
prev sibling parent reply Arun Chandrasekaran <aruncxy gmail.com> writes:
On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 10:30 PM Johan Coder via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:

 The person at
 https://youtu.be/cpTAtiboIDs?t=4462 loves to hear himself.


No, come on!! Stefan Koch aka UplinkCoder has difficulty in speaking.
That's absolutely fine. I love listening to his talks. He is _to the
point_ and doesn't beat around bush in his talks!

Watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crHnumzsLUs&list=PL3jwVPmk_PRxo23yyoc0Ip_cP3-rCm7eB&index=6
and many more.
May 13 2019
parent reply Johan Coder <johan coder.org> writes:
On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 21:50:48 UTC, Arun Chandrasekaran wrote:

 On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 10:30 PM Johan Coder via Digitalmars-d 
 <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:

 The person at
 https://youtu.be/cpTAtiboIDs?t=4462 loves to hear himself.


 No, come on!! Stefan Koch aka UplinkCoder has difficulty in 
 speaking. That's absolutely fine. I love listening to his 
 talks. He is _to the point_ and doesn't beat around bush in his 
 talks!

 Watch 
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crHnumzsLUs&list=PL3jwVPmk_PRxo23yyoc0I
_cP3-rCm7eB&index=6 and many more.


Thank you, I will watch.  But in the AGM his content was not good 
(and of course I have nothing against imperfect speech, mine is 
definitely worse).  Overall point is to keep remarks short and to 
the point so the meeting is covered entirely.
May 13 2019
parent Stefan Koch <uplink.coder googlemail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 14 May 2019 at 01:50:31 UTC, Johan Coder wrote:

 Thank you, I will watch.  But in the AGM his content was not 
 good (and of course I have nothing against imperfect speech, 
 mine is definitely worse).


Please do point out which content you had problems with?

It should be noted that I had an agenda to push. And a general 
meeting a good opportunity to do so.

Which topics would you rather have heard?

If I had not spoken up would it have changed anything?
May 14 2019