[ADMINISTRIVIA] Re: time for a new list?
Phil Howard
phil at whistler.intur.net
Wed Nov 4 17:47:45 UTC 1998
Edward S. Marshall wrote:
> This has already been tried (I believe someone created the
> "offtopic-bullshit" list at one point for inet-access), and just doesn't
> work; the people involved -don't use it-, and moderating a forum like
> NANOG would reduce the speed at which urgent operational messages would go
> out (before you say "make an exception list for those with clue", think
> about who decides who gets on that "clue list", and how people are removed
> from it). And this is a operator's list; you should expect a certain
> minimum of discussion of operations-related issues.
You say it has been tried, but but then your example is of something
entirely different. So I assert that it has NOT been tried. Should
I propose it again so you can really read it this time? I proposed
a web based FORUM ... not a mailing list.
I did mention in my own posting that I would not join if it were a
mailing list. Perhaps the "offtopic-bullshit" list for inet-access
failed because lots of people, maybe the majority, feel as I do, that
a high volume discussion does not belong in a mailbox.
The reason I proposed it is to help keep NANOG un-moderated. I do agree
that NANOG needs to remain un-moderated. I don't want to see any sort of
process of having to decide who can and who cannot post to NANOG, either.
I don't suggest that all discussion be rejected from the mailing list.
But a separate FORUM would at least be a place where people can divert
to carry out additional conversations, especially those things that are
of interest to many members of NANOG, but not of interest to all.
> Personally, NANOG's signal-to-noise ratio is still incredibly low compared
> to most lists I'm on. Allow me to voice my vote for leaving things the way
> they are: open posting for those who have actually worked out how to
> subscribe to the posting list.
I'm not suggesting that point be changed. My proposal was to help ensure
that it can remain this way.
> The one suggestion I'd make would be starting to be a little more
> aggressive about letting people know that their messages are offtopic (via
> Merit listadmins or appointed watchdogs), and clamping down on repeat
> offenders (by removal of posting priviledges). Self-moderation via
> consequences, vs. enforced moderation.
This may not be necessary if we have an area for diversion. All that needs
to be said when a thread on the mailing list gets too far off base is
"take it over to the forum". Then if someone refuses to do that they can
have their posting revoked.
--
-- *-----------------------------* Phil Howard KA9WGN * --
-- | Inturnet, Inc. | Director of Internet Services | --
-- | Business Internet Solutions | eng at intur.net | --
-- *-----------------------------* philh at intur.net * --
More information about the NANOG
mailing list