Subject Lines on the Mailing list: [WAS: Looking for a NH mail list talking about Linux]

Jon 'maddog' Hall maddog at li.org
Tue Mar 27 12:17:49 EDT 2007


>   I don't recall that we've *ever* had anyone go so far as to start
> campaigning for their preferred candidate.  The worst was some brief
> Bush-bashing.  But we have had several long, involved threads about
> mostly political issues.
> 
> Copyright issues.

I think that copyright issues and software (both free and otherwise) are
decent topics for the "social" list.  Again, with a decent "Subject
line" you could avoid them if you wished.  And perhaps we should be more
forceful in helping people to use digests, where these things have been
debated before....not to escape the issue, but to bring the prospective
poster up to speed with where we have been.
> 
> Taxes.
> 
Perhaps someone can draw an analogy where Taxes (other than the
"Microsoft Tax", or import duties) have an impact on free software.  If
they can't, then maybe we should not be discussing it.  If they can,
then probably on the "social" list.
> 
> Free speech issues.
> 
As relating to Free Software? Social

>Taxes.

> Effectiveness of voting.

Technical standpoints (encryption, authentication, logging, armoring,
verification) - technical

Social standpoints (closed vs open code) - tech

And in this particular case, perhaps a note to "announce" stating the
issue and where and what aspects will be discussed.

>Taxes.

Uhhh, Ben, could you please go to the archives and look up "Taxes?

>Patents

Again, both technical and social issues.  Which are being discussed?
For example, known ways of implementing mp3 without invoking the royalty
patent payment?  Technical

Why should we have to pay royalty payments for a "standard"? Social

> Tollbooths.  And so on.  People have argued that any of these might
> impact us, as NH Linux users, so they're on-topic.
> 
And Global warming and child pornography, but I have not seen long
discussions of them on the list either.
> 
>   For example, we (and by "we" I mean "me") have spent hours endlessly
> debating the finer points of, say, DNS implementation or security
> policies.  It may be that most of the membership really does not care.
>  So where does that go?

Ben, I could listen to you argue the finer parts of DNS implementation
for days.  Well, maybe hours.  At least a few minutes.

Then, I assume that I would ignore that subject line.  Or at least
emails from Ben Scott on that subject line.

> 
>   Meanwhile, a brief message or two on an upcoming TV special may be
> well-appreciated by the readership of the -tech list, no?

gnhlug-announce
> 
>   What about the occasional astronomy-related message?  Does that go
> to -tech (it's not Linux) or -social (but still technical)?

astronomy in general?  Aren't there mailing lists that deal with that?
Aren't you subscribed to them?

A cool FOSS astronomy application?  gnhlug-announce...one time, with a
pointer to where it will be discussed.

> 
>   I'm not just arguing to be argumentative (that's room 12A); these
> are questions that would need to be answered for anything like a list
> charter to be drawn up.
> 
> > ... (and then ignore them later with the proper subject line).
> 
>   Your parenthetical remark is one of my main points.  We still have
> the off-topic, endless debate, and discipline issues.  Moving the
> traffic around doesn't make those issues go away.
> 
> >> (2) What about discussions which touch both subjects?  Where does that go?
> >
> > Gentle guidance from the group.
> 
>   If gentle guidance works, wouldn't gentle guidance from the group be
> sufficient to just tell people to take it off-list?  Or just plain
> shut up?  :-)
> 
> > should be picked as carefully as the first subject line.
> 
>   I know from experience that the best subject line in the world can
> still end up completely off-topic in about three replies.  I suspect
> you do, too.  :)
> 
>   Humorous illustration:
> 
> http://www.kaitaia.com/funny/pictures/ThreadHijack/thread_direction.gif
> 
> > You could join "discuss" and get both.
> 
>   What happens when someone posts to -social, but I (subscribed to
> -discuss) reply to -discuss?
> 
> > We could try it, and if it does not work what have we really lost?
> 
>   Depends on the transition grief.
> 
>   For example, who do we subscribe to which list?  Or do we start both
> lists empty?
> 
> > I am actually not that displeased with the current arrangement ...
> 
>   Me neither.
> 
>   What I actually think might be best would be just the occasional
> nudge (from *anyone*) suggesting, "Hey, you two seem the only two
> people interested in this discussion, how about you take it off-list?"
>  People who ignore nudges can be nudged harder.  With a 2x4, as
> needed.

If it were only two it would be easier, but if there are two arguing and
ten who are "mildly interested", it becomes harder.

And often the 2x4 leaves splinters, even if not intentional.

> 
> > But I am concerned because there may be people who leave the "discuss" mailing
> > list because of the larger number of emails they get the whole day.
> 
>   It's not just quantity of mail, though.  Like you point out, many
> messages on a topic you, personally, are interested in, you will
> gladly read.  But even a couple messages on, say, tax law reform might
> make your eyes glaze over.

As much as I hate taxes, I do not think they belong on the gnhlug list.
Unless there is a law to tax closed-source code.

> 
> > Other people's mileage may vary.
> 
>   We're trying to be all things to all people.
So we have a GNHLUG .org meeting coming up May 31st.  Why don't we try
to come up with some guidelines that we can then pass by the membership
for comment?

Ted, could you put this on the agenda?

md



More information about the gnhlug-discuss mailing list