No words to eat man. Those numbers also indicate that there hasn't been a sudden explosion in message volume recently. It's been consitant for years. So, the need to drastically re-structure because of the Inbox doesn't fly. Stagnation, perhaps. Less un-answered questions being asked. Anyway, change or not, its all good.
-TH --- In [email protected], "Doug McCune" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > OK, I eat my words in terms of message growth then :) Touche. Thanks for > those stats. I'd actually be interested in getting access to the raw data > dump for the entire list to run some analysis, but that's getting off topic. > > Just one point, which has already been brought up, but now that we're > looking at #s, here are the #s for flexcomponents (note also that this > doesn't discount for cross-posts to flexcoders as well, which I assume are a > large portion too): > > Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2008 > 159<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3300> > 153 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3459> > 88<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3612> > 59 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3700> > 45<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3759> > 39 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3804> > > > > > > 2007 190 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/1087> > 234 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/1277> > 442<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/1511> > 149 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/1953> > 168<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/2102> > 260 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/2270> > 103<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/2530> > 183 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/2633> > 96<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/2816> > 119 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/2912> > 129<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3031> > 140 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3160> 2006 > > > > > > 297 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/1> > 68<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/298> > 211 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/366> > 89<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/577> > 184 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/666> > 237<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/850> > I'm not saying that if you split the group all the small groups will follow > that fate, but as everyone has mentioned, flexcomponents was specifically > made to try to keep custom component development out of the main flexcoders > mailing list, and I don't think anyone will argue that that has worked. > > Doug > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Anatole Tartakovsky < > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Doug, > > As far as I know, I am the only one in the NY office who did not > > unsubscribe from the group. Looks at the stats ( provided by Tim) or just go > > to the group page. Also, the number of users if I remember it correctly has > > been in 9K for at least 6 month - meaning you have the same number of > > people in and OUT - obviously you need to ask Matt if he has more detailed > > stats on unsubscribes count. > > Regards, > > Anatole > > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 5:35 PM, Doug McCune [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >> Actually, this is worth going back to, because your initial email said > >> that the group was "stagnant" and has plateaued with the number of new users > >> and questions. Except your reason for bringing it up is that the traffic has > >> gotten too much for you to read every message. So clearly the level of > >> traffic isn't stagnant. Unless what you're saying is that about 6 months ago > >> the traffic reached a critical level where you couldn't deal with the > >> traffic but then it stopped growing. > >> > >> So I guess I'm saying I question the claim that this list is "stagnant". > >> Almost 10,000 members and an average of 100 messages a day. Are you saying > >> that these stats have been the same for the past 6 months? And even if that > >> is true (although I'd like to see numbers before I accept that) then I don't > >> even necessarily think that this indicates that there's a problem. There's a > >> simple fact that a ton of questions have already been accurately answered by > >> this list. I would hope that the archived knowledge of the list serves to > >> answer more and more questions that newcomers have, meaning they don't need > >> to post the questions over and over. > >> > >> What is the real problem? I haven't heard anyone say that the traffic on > >> this single list has stopped them from asking any questions (although I'm > >> open to the possibility that this is true, and just hasn't been voiced). And > >> largely I think that the number of people answering questions has remained > >> high and the response times are still good. I have heard that the traffic > >> level has stopped people from reading the questions that others ask (I > >> certainly skim and sometimes skip entire days). I'd argue that a combination > >> of self-moderated subject tagging, as well as more aggressive pointing > >> repeat questions to cached answered (and then tagging the entire thread as a > >> repeat) will largely solve this problem. > >> > >> So do you have numbers that indicate the stagnation you are worried about? > >> > >> Doug > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Anatole Tartakovsky < > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> > >>> Matt, > >>> Let us review the goal - in the original post I explained that single > >>> group causes stagnation. If you agree with the numbers and reasoning behind > >>> it, let us look at the proposition in that light. IMHO, the mentioned > >>> measures while staying within the same single group would probably extend > >>> the number of users by 20-30% byhoping to reduce number of posted messages > >>> by the same percentage - but it is hardly the goal we are trying to achieve > >>> here. > >>> > >>> Realistically Adobe should be looking for place public pace to exchange > >>> ideas and networking as well as getting trivial help. The product and > >>> community are just too big for one group. Let us split it up and let each > >>> subgroup speak their own language. I would gladly moderate standalone > >>> enterprise/j2ee/best practices track. But looking few times a day @ the > >>> whole stream to fish out what might be related to the topic and having some > >>> messages falling through the cracks might be not the recommended "best > >>> practices" solution. > >>> > >>> Sincerely, > >>> Anatole > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Matt Chotin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hey folks, let's calm down a little here, K? > >>>> > >>>> Alright, based on what I've been seeing people say, here's my > >>>> suggestion. > >>>> > >>>> 1) Let's get an FAQ going that can be edited by moderators or members of > >>>> the community. This will be about common problems that folks run into. One > >>>> suggestion of course from me would be that we use the Cookbook for "how-to" > >>>> type questions. But for things that don't seem like they're cookbook > >>>> appropriate, we can put them in the FAQ. I like the idea of doing it in > >>>> Buzzword, though Buzzword docs won't come up in Google. Long-term I think > >>>> the right place might be in whatever we set up in the Adobe Developer > >>>> Center. But for now how about we just allocate a page off of the opensource > >>>> wiki. We can pick some moderators who can edit the page and I will get them > >>>> added so they can take care of it. We can also add the link to the FAQ to > >>>> the bottom of every email. > >>>> > >>>> 2) Some folks suggested that you either mark in the body or in the > >>>> subject something that indicates what you're talking about. Seems > >>>> reasonable. We could use some of the topics that were being suggested. [UX], > >>>> [Enterprise], [Data Services] [Announce], etc. We don't need to limit this, > >>>> but by following a convention of placing the general area of discussion, > >>>> folks will know if they're going to be capable of getting involved in the > >>>> thread. The more people follow this convention, the more efficient it will > >>>> become. > >>>> > >>>> 3) We can get aggressive on the moderation. Rather than just scanning > >>>> for spam, moderators can actually look at the posts by new users and decide > >>>> if they meet the general criteria for asking a question. If they don't, the > >>>> moderator can reject the post and point the user to the forum FAQ which has > >>>> posting guidelines. > >>>> > >>>> 4) We can update the flexcoders FAQ (which is actually linked at the > >>>> bottom of every single post) to include the updated posting guidelines and > >>>> remove the common questions section so that the forum FAQ is only about > >>>> forum etiquette and the coding FAQ is about the actual problems. > >>>> > >>>> If this sounds OK then what we need are the two kinds of moderators: > >>>> > >>>> 1. moderators for the forum itself who are willing to really look at all > >>>> posts that are in moderation and analyze whether they should be passed > >>>> through. If it is a poorly formed question, the post should be rejected with > >>>> a pointer to the forum FAQ. > >>>> 2. moderators for the FAQ who can pay attention to common questions and > >>>> update the FAQ as appropriate. > >>>> > >>>> If we're all on board, send those moderators to me and we can get things > >>>> set up. And folks can start following the tagging convention instantly in > >>>> the meantime. > >>>> > >>>> Matt > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > >
