Thats a great idea! The exchanges were the biggest clog previously, and this seems like a reasonable warning to use.
________________________________ From: William Pietri <[email protected]> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <[email protected]> Sent: Mon, November 30, 2009 11:57:21 AM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Housekeeping: One user on moderation today Ryan Lomonaco wrote: > My reading of it was X replies per person per day in each thread. I agree > with you that there should not be a set limit per thread as a whole. It might be interesting to combine that with a throttled number of replies from one individual to another. At least for me, the lowest-value messages are often ones where two people are arguing with one another, apparently forgetting the interests of the broader audience. With either of those, before creating a firm limit, an interesting step might be notification. E.g.: Dear X: I notice that in the last 24 hours you've sent 5 messages on the topic "Pedophilia and the non-discrimination policy", with 4 of them replying to person Y. That might be more than the average list subscriber wants to read. Before you reply again, you might consider taking a break, moving the discussion off-list, or asking list moderators how valualbe they're finding the discussion. Thanks, The Foundation-L Robot My theory here is that the problem may more be lack of awareness than intentional misbehavior, making feedback a reasonable substitute for control. William _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
