On Oct 5, 2006, at 10:14 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
Folks,
Although it's great fun to schedule a time for everyone to use
jabber together, there is nothing preventing our conducting exactly
the same style of process over email.
I know that might sound revolutionary, but it used to work pretty
well, before IM became popular.
This merely requires that we have a discussion 'chair' who
introduces the next topic, provides a bit of on-going oversight,
and declares a topic closed when it is.
Agreed.
Email supports this effort in a manner that Jabber does not. Email
offers a means to split conversations into threads, and redirect
message sources. Jabber topics are announced opened/closed, where
responses are limited to short blurbs. This is done while
participants track conversations offering a maze of abbreviated,
numerated, and hyphenated references from a variety of sources. The
number of displays available becomes a limiting factor in being able
to participate effectively, as time is extremely limited.
This effort is made even more complex with various server related
failures, where responses must be real-time before a topic is changed
and further discussion is thwarted. The half dozen jabber
participants is a sizable reduction from the mailing-list, and should
not be considered representative.
Jabber limits both the time and response any participant is
permitted. An inability to offer comprehensive responses should not
be considered improved behavior. The last two points brought to the
list slammed in the jabber session were revived only after
comprehensive responses were permitted within the larger community.
The reduced activity on this list at times seems to demonstrate these
are conversations. An exchange of concepts, where indeed not
everyone has the same perspective, should not be seen as a problem,
but rather as offering better review.
-Doug
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
