On Thursday 16 September 2004 21:40, Andrew J. Kopciuch wrote: > > I understand what you're saying and why. But, a good number of people do > > not use thread capable clients, or do not use this feature. So, is it > > better to make it easier on those who do, or those who don't? How do > > you make the judgement call? > > It is not a case of easier or not. If you can make a case that replying to > a message, deleting the body, and deleting the subject, is easier than just > typing in the mail list address, I'm all ears.
One example - say someone is using MS Outlook (I do at work, and know others do), and can't remember the email address for the mailing list. Outlook may only show "CLUG-Talk" as the sender, without the email address. Hitting Reply allows me to send a message to the list. Granted, I'm technically capable enough to find the address from such little information, but a LARGE number of non-technical people don't know how to do this. We have at least a couple such people on the list, I think. <snip/> > It is not dictating how to use tools. I would say it is helping others to > properly use them. Isn't this just rationalizing a dictated usage? > What would you say are pros to hijacking a thread? 1. Easier usage for non-technical people. 2. Increased membership by not requiring members to be technically savvy. 3. Increased productivity, by having to do fewer steps to get the job done (i.e send a message to the list) 4. Friendlier community because people don't get slapped (figuratively) for a minor transgression they may not even be aware of. Give me enough time, I'm sure I can come up with more... > What choice are you talking about. The choice of email clients? That is > not the issue. I would say it is either not knowing general accepted > behavior, or ignoring it. The choice to use any tool I choose, in any manner I choose. The choice to use a tool to do what I need without having to be an expert on "general accepted behavior". Free as in speech. That all said, I'm not meaning to be offensive. I simply stated my opinion, and your response seemed to challenge it. Thats fine with me, I don't mind when I get challenged, it forces me to clearly think about the position I was trying to have an opinion on and sometimes realize I was wrong. In this case, my opinion was simply that "what is right for you or me, may not be right for everyone". Also, I will intentionally play devil's advocate sometimes to try and explore both sides of an issue. I've yet to hear a compelling argument WHY we need a guideline/policy other than one or two members find this inconvenient. (Kevin Anderson - this is one point I will respectfully disagree with you on. I do not consider email hierarchal in nature unless it is by who it's from and when it arrived. Trying to build a hierarchy on a subject line or discussion thread is a dicey call in my eyes.) As mentioned in my original post, I DO agree that hijacking a thread can be thought of as bad form. But I also realize it WILL happen, and don't sweat about it. If it bothers anyone enough, then a gentle, polite, and private suggestion to the perpetrator may be in order, and it will probably happen less frequently. But it WILL still happen. As pointed out by Kevin, due to the way I PERSONALLY read my mail, hijacked threads will make no difference to me, whether we have a policy or not. I also realize there are others that it will make a big difference to. Create a guideline or policy if it is felt to be necessary. I'm but a single member on this list. Shawn _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca
