What's going to happen when we have 600+ members? I still say that we should use a forum
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Torrie Fischer <[email protected]>wrote: > On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 15:52:35 Chris Egeland wrote: > > Hey hackers! > > > > I've been watching the mailing lists very closely for some time now, and > > have noticed a general uptrend in the volume of email sent to the > > discuss list. Sometimes we get offtopic and go off on tangents about > > toast, or other topics which are fun to talk about, but are ultimately > > irrelevant to the space itself. Usually, this isn't a problem, but for > > someone who is interested in the space, but not the minutiae of every > > little bit of day-to-day operations, it can quickly turn into an > > overwhelming amount of email. > > > > Today, I'm asking for input on how we should proceed with the mailing > > lists. As you may know, we currently have 5 lists, two of which are > > public, one semipublic, and two private. [email protected] and > > [email protected] are the two that everyone knows about. Members may > > know that they are automatically subscribed to [email protected]. > > Board members are subscribed to [email protected] and us sysadmin folk > > are members of [email protected]. > > > > My recommendation is to create an "offtopic" list, which would have very > > very lax rules on what can be posted. Anything you want to chat about. > > Want to debate why the RubberDucks is a terrible team name and the Aeros > > was WAY better? Sure, no problem. Got a pothole on Market street that > > irks you every day? Have at it. Joke threads? Toast? No problem. The > > other side to this idea is that the discuss list would have some basic > > rules imposed that mean that any topics to the discuss list would be > > required to be relevant to the space itself. Projects occurring at the > > space would be relevant topics, open hours discussion, meeting minutes, > etc. > > Looking through the archives, I can see three sources of off-topicness: > > * A newbie comes to SYNHAK and has no idea what the unwritten rules for > [email protected] are and starts an irrelevant thread > * A newbie comes to SYNHAK and has no idea what the unwritten rules for > [email protected] are and makes an irrelevant reply to an on-topic thread > * Someone who is familiar with the unwritten rules for [email protected] > purposely going off-topic. > > For the first two, how will they know that [email protected] is for off- > topic stuff if they signed a mailing list signup sheet at a booth? Should > we > tell them "If you want to hear and make mustache jokes or other off-topic > drivel that isn't about hacking, you can subscribe to [email protected] > ." > > For the third, its usually overlooked as only established members of the > community do that and they have a feel for when it is acceptable. > > Here's a solution that'll actually work: Just tell the people going > off-topic > that you don't want it on the discuss list. Usually you only need to tell a > newbie just once and they'll learn the ropes. > > The reason I know that this will work is because this is what happens in > the > real world. Have a look at archives of Usenet groups around September of > every > year before 1993. They'd get a batch of fresh-faced newbies who don't > understand the culture. The regulars would quickly jump in and inform them > that, while they are welcome to participate, there are a few social norms > that > should be followed regarding staying on topic, being polite, and other > netiquette. > > Then again, we are a do-ocracy. If someone wants to throw the discuss list > into moderation and enforce a rule that every post is on-topic, you're more > than welcome to take over my job as mailman administrator. I'd feel as > though > I'm being treated like a child with no manners for something I didn't > contribute to. Thats a quick way to make everyone feel unwelcome. If > someone > wants to put together a web-based forum for us to use, go ahead. I'd wager > that none of the technically minded people who live on email will use it > for > any significant period of time. > > As evidence of both of these statements being true, I encourage folks to > find > me a successful hackerspace near our end of the peer-to-peer driven > spectrum > of community involvement that satisfies both conditions which appear to be > the > ones that this thread is trying to solve: > > * Doesn't use an email list as their primary asynchronous discussion > channel > * Has infallible enforcement of topicalness on their primary discussion > list > > > > > So, let me know what you guys think. I'm not officially proposing this, > > but we may chat about it at the next meeting as a discussion topic, > > because it would fundamentally mean we change how the mailing lists are > > organized and structured. > > > > Thanks, > > Chris > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
