Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

I've seen this in other forums, but note that correlation isn't causality. Still trying to throttle a forum because someone think it has to much postings (it is to popular) is dangerous. It can be to quiet… ;) But hey, I have only a "45" on the popularity rank! [1] I have a long way to go! =D

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Your thesis implies admin actions made this list unpopular. I think it is plain to see this *wasn't* the case with this list. Indeed, some opinions voiced in this thread indicate people want *more* admin action. A. On Aug 26, 2017 6:30 PM, "John Erling Blad" wrote: 1. The

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

1. The list gets popular 2. The list attracts people 3. The people sends emails 4. Other people reads emails with opinions 5. Other people don't want to read about other peoples opinions 6. Other people want to limit other peoples opinions 7. Admins starts to wonder how to limit emails 8. Admins

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Hi, 2017-08-23 7:03 GMT+03:00 John Mark Vandenberg : > Hi list members, > > Proposal #1: Monthly 'soft quota' reduced from 30 to 15 The problem with this system is, IMO, not the quota, but the 'soft' part. There is obviously a thin line between not wanting to break the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Dear Wikimedia-l subscribers, Throughout this discussion several requests have been made regarding banning of users from the list. Since we do not have an official banning policy approved by the community, we have drafted our thoughts on the matter, as well as a proposed procedure for your