Personally I'd prefer fewer (ie, no) CFPs. Maybe somebody gets value out of them, but I don't.
-david zooko wrote: > Folks: > > Throughout this list's long and successful history, the moderation > policy has been very simple: you have to subscribe in order to post. > (I elected to enact this simple and public policy over Bram's > original proposal, which if I recall correctly had something to do > with not inviting Oskar. :-)) > > In addition to that, I have a few times over the years sent private e- > mail to specific people, suggesting that their contributions to the > list could be improved in one way or another. > > When CFPs and announcements of conferences started getting posted to > this list, I decided to continue with the same policy -- non- > subscribers who sent CFPs got the standard rejection message, > subscribers who sent CFPs got through. > > However the rate of CFPs has climbed, and recently I've started to > wonder if the ratio of CFPs to actual conversation might deter > conversation, new subscribers, etc. I wouldn't want that. Oh! I > have an idea, how about if I set up a separate list named p2p-hackers- > announce for CFPs? > > Please let me know what you think, publicly or privately -- option A: > laissez faire, status quo, et cetera; option B: I create p2p-hackers- > announce and start asking anyone who posts CFPs to this list to > please direct them to that list. > > > By the way, I'm looking for a job and/or funding for my open source > project: > > http://allmydata.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2009-March/001461.html # > tahoe needs funding! (and Zooko is available for work!) > > > Regards, > > Zooko > _______________________________________________ > p2p-hackers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers _______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
