My 0.02 is to keep one list. That said, I'd welcome us to apply some self-monitoring for what we post. Besides the obvious trimming of included material to just the pertinent bits, some other thoughts which might be applied:
- If as a participant you notice it's just you and one or two others continuing to post, consider taking it off list. - If what you're doing is not really discussion-y (say the recent request to collect/catalog all the moves - not meaning to single you out Sam, that's just a great example) consider other tools to achieve that (e.g.: a wiki or shared open google spreadsheet, etc.) and offer to post back the results. - If you find yourself making the same or similar points several times across different threads, consider that the message may already have been received. - I'm sure others have some great additional suggestions. Should we be able to agree to a set of list values/behaviors, then possibly a periodic automatic reminder of them would help us stay on track? It is the diversity/balance of voices I appreciate here. I hope we can see that continue by keeping folks interested and involved to a level that informs without overloading. Thanks all for your participation, Don On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Aahz Maruch <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 11, 2013, Chris Weiler (SW) wrote: > > > > B. If we keep this list as-is, how do we make it easy for someone to > > determine what will be relevant to their level of interest? How do > > we know when to ask someone to take their debate of a trivial issue > > off list? > > > > C. How do we keep the experience of the list useful and relevant to > > the most number of people at the widest range of experience levels? > > By amount of time calling, I surely rank as one of the newest people > here (especially if you don't include square dance calling, which I > formally started just a month ago). I started calling contras less than > a year ago and have only been in front of the mic three or four times. > > OTOH, I've been doing contra, square, and IFD for more than a quarter > century, and I'm an online junkie (probably 20 or 30 mailing lists, > though many are somewhat moribund and/or announce-only, plus another ten > still-active netnews groups (some of which are private)). > > IOW, I'm inclined to the trivial minutiae even when I don't know > anything and especially when I do. ;-) > > I guess my point is that it's hard to categorize people, let alone > discussions. > -- > Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 > http://rule6.info/ > <*> <*> <*> > Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers >
