On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Mike Abney wrote:
> The main reason people think [off-topic] or [OT] is a good idea is
> not to announce that they are doing something inappropriate. It's to
> be considerate of those who do not ever wish to see off-topic
> posts. A simple subject filter for everything containing [OT] or
> [off-topic] enables people to group them or delete them
> automatically.
>
> As for why or whether any off-topic posts are appropriate... Those
> who do it with the subject flag generally feel that they are posting
> something important or relevant to the list, but not necessarily
> 100% on the topic of the list. Those who do not use the flag either
> do not know any better or think that this is the correct forum --
> the latter being in need of some serious netiquette schooling. The
There are a few problems with this.
First of all, the list policy is no off-topic posts, so no one should
be posting them in the first place, labelled or not.
Now, as you somewhat allude, whether something is off-topic is not
really a binary question (e.g. yes or no), but more a continuous
function (e.g. what percentage it relates to the core topic). So
"off-topic" isn't so easy to define (and that's probably why it's not
spelled out more specifically in the list policy). But something
needn't be "100% on the topic" to be relevant and appropriate -- I
don't think anyone has tried to say that (even if it were possible to
define things that precisely). People accept things up to a certain
distance away, say, for example, 75%. So for those relevant things,
no "[Off-Topic]" labelling is necessary, because, really, it's *NOT*
off-topic.
Further, this leads to problems with the idea of using "[Off-Topic]"
labellings to filter on. What specific people are interested in won't
necessarily match-up 100% with the core topic, or even with how close
something is to the core topic. What would be much more effective for
filtering purposes is a descriptive subject line. Then someone can
decide based on that whether to filter, not on how close something is
to the core topic or someone else's opinion of whether it's off-topic.
> current MS vs. Java threads are great examples of threads that
> should have their subjects flagged, but also *do* deserve mention on
> this list -- and all Java-related lists. This thread is another good
OK, it was mentioned. I don't think anyone got upset at its mention,
or for the first few responses after that. It's when things got more
dragged out that people (including Pier) called for a stop to it.
> example -- it's about the list, but not as Nic put it, "helping our
> understanding of servlets." On most mailing lists I have subscribed
> to in the last 5 of my 10 or so years of mailing list experience
> that is absolutely fine so that is my "default setting," so to
> speak. If the list owner thinks that is not adequate, that's his/her
> prerogative and should be placed prominently in a list FAQ. (Note
> that the "policy and guidelines" for this list mention looking for
> other, more appropriate, lists for off-topic posts but does not
> mention any overall policy on off-topic posting. Yes, you do need to
> be that specific to avoid problems -- at least with people who are
> used to lists with a more lenient policy.)
>
> FWIW, now that I know Pier considers even limited off-topic posting
> a Very Bad Thing, worthy of mailing-list capital punishment, this is
> my last off-topic post to this list.
[ ... ]
Perhaps the list policy could do with some more specifics, but that
isn't exactly the easiest or most fun thing to do. Hopefully, most
everyone here will act professional and not abuse the list (which is
much of what the policy is really about anyway).
As to removing people from the list, that's not an easy question, and
I'm glad I don't have to worry about it. I don't think Pier had
removed anyone prior to this incident, so I don't think you can say
he's been too strict. The list has had its good time and bad times,
and perhaps removing some people occasionally will help serve the
purpose of keeping the list basically on topic.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Milt Epstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 9:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [off-topic]
>
>
> > On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Thompson, Willard (GTICCC) wrote:
> >
> > > I agree with this considering the monumental decisions that will
> > > effect the technology community, this fall. Just put/include
> > > [off-topic] in the subject. Also, threads like this would fade out
> > > anyway.
> >
> > I don't see why people think putting [Off-Topic] in the subject line
> > makes it OK to post something off-topic. Do you really think that
> > announcing you're about to do something inappropriate makes it any
> > less inappropriate? (As if that couldn't be determined often from the
> > subject anyway.)
> >
> > I also agree with Nic (and Pier, who is the list manager, so I don't
> > see why people don't listen to what he says) that we've had enough of
> > this topic. Even if you take a lenient policy and allow a little bit
> > of information posting and discussion on it, we've already had that,
> > and it's time to move on. Anyone who wants to discuss it further
> > should do so amongst themselves, and/or find and/or create a more
> > appropriate place to discuss it.
Milt Epstein
Research Programmer
Software/Systems Development Group
Computing and Communications Services Office (CCSO)
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff SERVLET-INTEREST".
Archives: http://archives.java.sun.com/archives/servlet-interest.html
Resources: http://java.sun.com/products/servlet/external-resources.html
LISTSERV Help: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/user/user.html
