On Thu, 2004-01-15 at 15:46, Dave Phillips wrote: > Greetings: > > I thought about posting a response to the linuxaudio.org controversy > but I've opted for posting some numbers instead. > > It was pointed out that LAD can claim more than 700 members now. > Very cool, I love it. I'm not sure exactly what those numbers mean, but > I do know that only about 1/10 of that figure actually post regularly to > the list. So out of the 700 only ~70 are consistent contributors.
But is it a reason to keep discussions private, to create a private mailinglist for that reason? Did anybody ask the developers of linuxsampler and lilypond to join p-consortium? Those people are definitely active contributors to the list. But the point is, all those people could be asked through lad. > > On January 7 Linux Journal On-line posted my second monthly column > (this one about Planet CCRMA and AGNULA). I checked for the number of > reads this morning: +10000. That's right, more than ten thousand in > little over one week. I point this out not to shine my own light, but to > indicate again that far more people are interested in Linux audio > development than the mail lists' membership numbers suggest. As Alfons already pointed out, those are people interested in linux audio. They might not even be users. I guess you would get even more if you posted it on slashdot. > > (Actually I have a lot of thoughts on all this stuff, but I'm really > just too busy here for further comment.) Regarding [OT?] - agreed, it's OT on lad, i propose to rename the p-consortium mailing list as Linux Audio Advocacy Mailing list (another laa? or laad? :) and make it public. Marek
