When I see people arguing on the list about arguing off list, it kinda reminds me of the old question; what came first the chicken or the egg? yeah and I'm doing it on list (in case you didn't notice). Enjoy guys.
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 17:03:27 -0600, Steven Critchfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 16:46 -0600, Jay Milk wrote: > > Yes yes, it's totally hypocritical to post the following, but I think > > everyone should read it (yes, I think I'm just THAT important). > > > > Here's a perfect example of a mis-post that was blown out of proportion. > > When I first saw Cesar's post, I responded off-list to the effect that > > this would be the wrong forum to ask this question. If others had done > > the same -- responded off-list -- or simply ignored that message, that > > would have been the end of the thread. Instead, 16 more messages > > clogged the list. > > > > Yes, it's necessary to explain to posters why certain messages won't get > > answered. But I don't think it's necessary to do it in front of 10,000 > > people. Yes, it's annoying that some folks don't understand or respect > > the "rules" of this list -- but in absence of a moderator, there aren't > > really any rules here. It's also annoying that some don't make the > > effort to find an answer before asking, and then get upset that nobody > > will explain to them what a telephone is, or what "VoIP" means. But if > > you look back at the last week or two, the majority of the "noise" on > > this list comes from those who are responding and then enter a drawn out > > argument as to why the initial post bothered 10,000 people. > > > > I believe the list volume would decrease by at least 50% if we all > > simply took our disagreements off-list, or ignored messages that don't > > belong. And in the process, the "signal-to-noise ratio" here would > > greatly improve. > > > > If you don't agree, please ignore this message or respond off-list. If > > you do agree, great. > > The problem of taking these messages off list is exactly that no one > else sees the answer or at least the reason for no answer. There are > many lists that I come across that seem to think that answering via > private email is a good idea. Trouble is that the information then isn't > archived for later searchers to reap the benefit of the exchange. > > If the occasional user doesn't get reminded publicly that what they did > was wrong, you would have more people assuming it is okay to do the same > thing. > > If you didn't see the occasional person pulled over for speeding, would > you eventually let your speed creep up while driving? > > You are right though that the extra responses are usually not necessary. > I understand that some feel the need to smooth the waters. I equate it > to a child getting spanked by one parent and running crying to the other > parent for some consoling. I am quick to "spank" users who misbehave. > > -- > Steven Critchfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > _______________________________________________ > Asterisk-Users mailing list > Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users