'Tone of the list' discussion

[Preston Kutzner]

On May 14, 2009, at 4:30 AM, marc wrote:

> Oliver Grawert said:
>
> I don't believe that anything has been proven. I think this list  
> behaves
> like many others I've observed and participated in over the years.  
> Where
> there is a common purpose, then things tend to be calm, when there are
> divergent options then personalities express themselves; sometimes  
> wods
> are spoken.
>
> No amount of moderation - other than full, which would kill the list
> completely - will stop that, and I believe that it's naive to believe
> otherwise. I mean head-shakingly, goggle-eyed, staring at the floor
> naive. But I understand politics too.

I would have to disagree with you on this one.  I only speak for  
myself, but I do not believe the list would be killed if there were  
full moderation.  It might cause it to atrophy a bit, but I don't  
believe it would be completely killed.  I personally would prefer  
moderation in this list, because it is very apparent that a large  
number of users (possibly just a vocal minority) tend to not follow  
the rules of conduct for this list.  Apparently the Ubuntu community  
is incapable of self-moderating the list, otherwise Oliver wouldn't be  
tasked with finding people willing to moderate the list.

I'm also a participant on other mailing lists, such as openbsd-users  
and postfix-users.  Both of those lists do not have apparent  
moderators (although I'm sure they do), however, they are quite  
efficiently self-moderated.  Those on this list who find people who  
constantly refer to the "code of conduct" for this list and constantly  
remind people to stay on-topic, trim replies and not top-post as "Net  
Police" would definitely not like the above-mentioned lists.  It is  
common that if someone doesn't read the list rules before posting they  
will receive a curt response telling them to read the list rules and  
post accordingly before they receive help.  Yes, it's a put-off for  
some people, and after such a reply they might not come back.  But,  
the rules are there for a reason and are expected to be adhered to.

I don't understand the current aversion in this list to making sure  
people read and follow the code of conduct.  It's ultimately the  
reason why the Ubuntu team is looking to moderate this list.

>
> Thanks for the link, but I still think that you are being less than
> forthcoming with the information. I feel that if you wanted to be  
> fully
> inclusive, then you would be willing to provide unambiguous  
> information
> about the discussion to be had. For whatever reason, you are not doing
> that.

If the information has already been posted to this list, in a previous  
thread, why should Oliver be required to re-post that information  
again in this thread?  The list does have a searchable archive and the  
information can be obtained by using it (or through your own email  
client, if you have been on the list long enough and keep your own  
archive of posts).  I personally find it poor form to harp on Oliver  
for not wishing to re-post information that has already posted.  Yes,  
he could do so and save you the work of looking through past posts,  
but you are perfectly capable of using the tools that are available to  
get that information as well.  You possibly could have already gotten  
that information in the time it took you to post this reply  
complaining about him not just handing you the information.

>
> Nevertheless, I'll wade through the multiple links you sent to uncover
> the information. It doesn't have to be this hard, you know.

In light of all that has been said, I do find it encouraging to see  
that some people on this list are willing to do some work to find  
answers, albeit grudgingly.

As the adage goes: "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day.  Teach a  
man to fish, feed him for a lifetime."

-- 
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?