On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 10:10:15 -0800
Chuq Von Rospach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am seeing more and more messages of the form "I know this is
> off-topic, but..." -- things where the poster knows and admits
> upfront it doesn't belong on a list, but has decided to send it
> anyway.
I tend to reward such with a warning followed by an automatic
unsubscribe. Brick bats to be sure, but they seem to work.
> What I can't decide is whether this is a problem, or whether any
> 'cure' would be worse than the disease. On the one hand, I see
> this kind of side-chatter as community building (mostly,
> sometimes, it's just clueless people, but a lot of it is mining of
> a trusted community for non-topic information).
When I do allow them, which is rare (I tend to hand moderate or
install MLM-side filters to auto-hold such posts) I often predefine
a max length for the thread ala by inserting a comment in the
initial posting ala:
EdNote: This is pretty off-topic so let's keep this thread short
if possible. Any messages to this thread after <date> will be
automatically rejected/deleted. Thanks.
For those I don't predefine a length, if the thread lives too long
I'll make a list posting ala:
Writing as list owner:
This thread is getting pretty far off topic. Let's call it
quits for now or move it to another forum. I'll be rejecting
posts to this thread (unless you give a damned good reason why
not) starting at <time>. Thanks.
> On the other hand, these things can lead towards an attitude of
> "topic is optional", and some of the discussions can take off with
> a life of their own and clutter up the list, creating all of the
> problems too much side-chatter brings.
I try and build lists where the membership have the general view
that they need to aggressively defend topicality. This adds to my
moderation overhead as I get a steady stream of, "Would a post like
XXX be Okay for the list?" which is kind of funny as less that 1% of
those queries are for posts/topics that would be off-topic.
Of course the sad aspect is that the one's most concerned by
topicality are also the one's I most want posting (and the one's
least concerned...).
> What do people think about this stuff? How do you manage it? Are
> you seeing the same trend I am, with people doing this more often?
One thing I've done is to create a parallel list specifically for
such off-topic out-of-band conversations. I then redirect
marginal/off-topic posts there as they occur on the main list (with
a note to the poster that I did and why). It has a smaller
membership than the main list of course, but provides a valuable
venting/chat ground for the main list. Typical traffic for the meta
list includes such things as job offers, I'm available for work,
social meetings and dinners related to the main list, not really
on-topic news events (eg one fellow had one of his user's name their
new baby after his product/service (really!)), and so forth.
> It seems to me there's some aspect of laziness here ("rather than
> find the right place, I'll ask the close place") but combined with
> the "know these guys are clueful" aspect, so there's a mixed
> message here. Definitely hard to decide where to draw the lines in
> the sand, so I thought I"d throw it out and see what others are
> thinking.
The main criteria I apply are:
Can/will it help (someone, the list, life in general)?
What are the risks (eg is the topic itself flammable/distractive)?
How easy will it be to control?
What perception will it create of the list, and how might it
change current perception?
Rigidly inflexible topicality becomes inhuman and ultimately
alienating. Adding a little life now and then (eg there were a
number of birth announcements on one of my technical lists) along
with other humanising factors can do a lot to build both a community
and a social network.
Not that you don't know this Chuq...
--
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
