On Sun, Jul 21, 2002 at 08:43:52PM -0700, Nick Arnett wrote: > I've learned not to trust new software until it has been thoroughly > tested.
Prudent. > There are about a dozen who have agreed to participate. > > As anyone might expect, conversation on the test list has included > the topic of how to prevent the kind of problems Brin-L has been > experiencing, since the transition to the new list will be an > opportunity to make a fresh start. The idea under consideration was > suggested by David Brin -- something similar to AOL's "evilling" > points system. I'm looking at implementing something like that. If I > do, we have already said the obvious -- that such a system will need > to be reviewed and agreed upon by the consensus of the membership > periodically. And tweaked as needed. Sounds like a conspiracy to me. None of that is necessary for testing the software. And the subject could have been discussed on Brin-L. Why was it not? Why is a secret, elite "pre-discussion" necessary? > Because the new list has to be tested on the new list software and > server. Otherwise, it wouldn't be a test. (Had this been an actual > list, you would have been instructed where to tune...) Then why discuss real subjects in secret on it, when I'm sure a number of people would have discussed it and given input on the full Brin-L? -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/
