[Nottingham] Proposal

[Martin]

Michael Leuty wrote:
> On Friday 04 Nov 2005 01:10, Michael Simms wrote:
[---]
> I'm not really in favour of having many sub-lists. "General" and "Geek" 
> seems about right to me.

That has been my thoughts also.


> The amount of traffic on the current list is comfortable. I'm not 
> interested (or, indeed, able to understand) all the postings, but that 
> doesn't bother me, I just press the key to move onto the next message 
> when foxed. And sometimes my interest is caught by a posting which I 
> wouldn't have thought "a priori" to be useful.

It does worry me a little that we are rather too geekie for most users. 
But then also, general users seem not to post much...

My view is that any and whatever question should be posted. Then, once 
contact is made, detailed debug can be taken offlist or down to whatever 
meeting place thereafter.


> If there are sub-groups of "meeting attenders" and "list only folk" then 
> I'm sure we can continue to co-exist. The LOF won't mind the MA people 
[---]

I think we well accept the different groups of NLUG people on the list. 
Even if I have partaken in stirring up the mud a little to cloudy the 
waters... Whatever, a critical mass is still needed to keep the group 
alive and more than just Yet Another Maillist.


> I suspect that what people really want is a sub-list "nlug-abuse" where 
> all ranting and abusive postings would go, and to which they would not 
> subscribe.

Isn't that called /dev/null ?


[---]
> we are angry, and never ever be rude about anyone. Polite expression of 
> disagreement or disappointment makes much more effective advocacy. If you 
> attack someone and tear their position to shreds, you only entrench their 
> opinion by forcing them to devise plausible justification.

And that is always a learning exercise... ;-)


> Human nature being what it is, intemperate postings will slip through from 
> time to time. A mailing list cannot be moderated. Paul Mellors' forums 
[---]

I'd rather not go that route if at all possible. We seem to have very 
good "peer pressure" from the group that keeps the list reasonably 
moderated for itself. The listadmins have a bad enough time clearing out 
the spam junk and false positives. (No html /please/...)


> My suggestion would be that there needs to be some sort of "light-touch" 
> policing of this list, whereby an Official Person (in regulation blue 
> uniform and large boots) makes it clear (in a genteel way) that abusive 
> postings are not acceptable whatever the provocation, and should not be 
> replied to. Apologies would be left to the discretion of the offender.

I hope and think that we have that already.

As poster and a listadmin, I try to keep an even hand, even if I might 
be on occasion a flame-fest perpetrator myself in some people's eyes.

I am effectively moderated myself by other listadmins and by the people 
on this list. If you all stay quiet, then who is to know?


> (I've still not read "that" 66-post thread to which I returned from 
> holiday last weekend, by the way. Will I miss anything useful if I delete 
> it unread?)

Well, you can save yourself a lot of reading and analysis by waiting for 
my summary and apology some time next week. The nature of /my/ apology 
depends on events and comments over the next few days.

Or you can have a good giggle at the bun fight.


Myself, I'm still musing on a few thoughts for what NLUG /is/ and what 
is wanted.

Cheers all,
Martin

http://nottingham.lug.org.uk/

11th and 12th November, Linux Awareness Days

-- 
----------------
Martin Lomas
martin at ml1.co.uk
----------------