From: Ric Thorpe (ric_thorpe@ccmail.llu.edu)
Date: Thu Dec 28 1995 - 14:13:56 EST
I appreciate Mario's suggestion of "summary" postings. HOWEVER, I
don't think it should replace the individual responses. I like to
read them, warts and all, in (nearly) real time. I'm not sure I would
trust anyone to edit them and bring forward all the nuances and subtle
details of the original posting. And too much lag time would
seriously dampen the excitement and electricity that normally
characterizes this channel.
A summary posting is a GREAT idea if someone were willing to do it, I
think the original inquisitor would be the most appropriate editor for
such a compendium. A summary would also be of service if the thread
was not of immediate interest, but was something to be filed as a
future reference.
In the same spirit, it would be useful if the "subject" heading was
more carefully utilized. That is, it should be apparent that a posting
is an original, a reply, or a summary, and clearly what the topic is.
That alone would save countless hours of bit-bucketting impertinent
material.
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Suggestions for the New Year
Author: Mario Roederer <Roederer@Beadle.Stanford.EDU> at InternetMail
Date: 12/27/95 1:03 PM
I have a couple of suggestions for the Moderators (who have already been doing
an excellent job)!
First, to group messages that are solely devoted to a single topic (thread) into
a single mail message. Perhaps, by collecting responses to a query or an
ongoing debate for a few days, and then concatenating them into a single
message. This could also reduce the amount of copied material from the original
message ("> ...") since the original could simply be tacked on at the top of the
collection. Maybe the mailing could be done only on two days a week (unless
someone has an urgent questions), and messages in between those times are
collated.
I also strongly urge people who respond to questions to post their responses to
the original questioner rather than the list. If people on the list are
interested in the answers received, they can ask the person who first posted the
question for the summary of responses. In the past, some people have been
extremely good about summarizing the responses they got directly from people and
posting that on the net. This kind of processed information is much more useful
to the general readership, in that not everyone has to read duplicate answers,
trivial answers, etc.
Finally, I would like to ask the moderators to prevent what recently happened to
me: a private message I sent to another person was posted by that person on the
mailing list without my permission, in the form of a quoted reply. This kind of
publication of a private message is, as everyone would agree, inappropriate.
Unfortunately, these suggestions involve a greater investment of effort on the
part of the moderators (as well as the users)--something difficult to ask for
without compensation. I wonder whether it would be possible to have a group of
people (derived from the users who read the list) who would serve as moderators
(editors?) for periods of time? A volunteer editor could be responsible for
gathering messages about a certain topic, and doing the collation suggested
above.
In other words: how can we distribute the tasks necessary to maintain this list
across at least some of the users who gain from it?
mr
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu Jan 01 2004 - 17:30:41 EST
