I've been trying to stay out of all this but the logic here just made me bite and chime in.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Abele" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <community@apache.org> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 12:38 PM Subject: Information channels, Re: Inappropriate use of announce@ [snip] > I think what David and others (including me) wanted to suggest is to go > the > way of least astonishment/frustration: Surely nobody disagrees. > we know that everybody has > his/her > own preferences Again I would have thought that most of us are grown up enough to realise that. > so why don't we just go with a pull-model instead of > pushing > the *whole content* onto some list of subscribers? Now just hold on here. How do you get to the assumption that the pull-model is the solution? Can't people's preferences include the push-model too? > Why not just > *announce* > the availability of the newsletter? Do we really have to dump it to some > list? And, if we have to, why can't this be a dedicated list? And now we get back to common sense. Using a dedicated list for the full contents and a preceding announcement on the announce@ list lets the readers exercise their preference perfectly. Those who don't like 100k emails don't have to take them, and those that like to read offline can do so at their leisure. Note that this approach could equally coexist with the suggested RSS solution, although the RSS proponents should step forward to organise this if they want it. [snip] > > > I very much enjoyed the hard work that Tetsuya put into the newsletter > > and I'm very sad to see him step down because of such puny reasons as > > to > > which mailing list this newsletter should be sent. > > I fully agree and given that nobody critizied the newsletter itself, I > can > not understand why Tetsuya resigned. That looks really weird to my > little > brain... > I know from first hand experience that editing the Newsletter (Jakarta Newsletter in my case) is a time consuming process that tends to be silently appreciated. As such, comments perceived (not necessarily intended) to be negative quickly swamp the positive ones and it's very easy to burn out. If people think that the newsletter@ address is the way forward then lets make the list now. If people think that the distribution should be different then they have an ideal opportunity to change it: just step up to edit the next edition. Hopefully Tetsuya will continue to contribute and may come back to edit future issues but I fully understand why he feels ready to step down right now. Anyone who doesn't understand should volunteer to handle an issue or two. Whatever Tetsuya feels, there's no reason for the newsletter to die. Equally we shouldn't rely on the energy of one person to edit every issue. IMHO we should decide now how the next issue will be distributed and towards the end of November call for a volunteer to "release" the letter. If that person wants to continue afterwards then fine, otherwise we just call for another editor in January. Anyway, just my 2p, Rob --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
