From: Marty Galyean (marty@heavyreckoning.com)
Date: Sun Apr 09 2006 - 04:58:25 PDT
Jim Cooney wrote:
>Hi Mike,
>
>I think you've just made a very valid point. A lot of the questions posted
>to the list are not being replied to on list.
>As a result the list becomes diluted to a point with idle chit chat that is
>obviously starting to wear people down.
>
>I think if all postings were replied to on list it would help the list no
>end and make it enjoyable for most if not all again.
>
>Well said Mike!
>
>
>
I've been admin'ing another list for awhile and I ended up just setting
the default "Reply-to:" to the list address. This seems to keep the
answers back on the list, but the trade off is you get more stuff that
should be off list, on the list. The solution to that was not to worry
about it. The only rules on that list are: no personal insults (ad
hominems), if you post news, research, strong contrarian opinions, etc,
then you should post some links, book titles, etc with supporting cites
and evidence, and for Pete's sake, *try* to change the subject line when
you hijack a thread!
Over all it has worked out well. Once in a while we get a crank whining
about 'off topic' this and that, we all tell him about the delete key
and the option of moving on to another list because "we *like* it this
way". We also strip *all* attachments. Seems to work alright. The 'on
topic' nature of the list is fairly narrow so there isn't a lot that can
be said so the 'near topic' and 'off topic' is fairly welcome stuff,
actually. As others have pointed out, you wouldn't restrict talk to MVs
at an MV meet, so what is the imperitive to restrict list traffic to
MVs? On pondering this issue I think a lot of the 'stay on topic!'
mentality comes from the older style usenet news atmosphere where forums
were mirrored all over the world and bandwidth and storage requirements
were greatly amplified by this mirroring. Off topic chatter in usenet
forums was simply much more of a technical pain. But some users got
attached to the restrictions. A mailing list is a completely different
critter. It isn't mirrored all over the world and members receive
messages directly from the server and can delete unwanted mail
immediately upon their own discretion without denying other members the
joy and wonder of reading it.
On the other list, the view is that the list is a "Sports Bar" which is
centered on a theme of interest, but conversation is not restricted to
the main topic, but rather restricted to rules of basic civility and
such. Any on topic post or question is immediately answered by several
experts from various angles and I many off topic questions are answered
by experts also! (a couple of lawyers, several cops, military history
buffs, etc, really make for some great off topic learning!). I
inherited the techical admin'ing of that list 4 (5?) years ago, so take
no credit for the formati that serves it so well. It was going strong
prior to my involvement with the same format and the official
"moderators" (more like "bouncers" for the uncivil) have been with it
all along. It shows no sign of decline now. On the other hand, another
list with the same topic, that was moderated to strictly on-topic,
withered years ago and gets maybe one or two posts a year, and these
posts tend to be the 'is there anybody here?' variety with the
occasional reply that the person should go to the more active list.
Anyway, that is all the proof I need. An off topic rampant list that
survives with 100+ posts a day and several hundred members over several
years is *much* better than an empty list with no answers to any
questions at all. If the off topic stuff gives people the info they
need, I don't care about 'on/off topicness'.
Marty
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 18 2006 - 21:43:49 PDT