the general etiquete is to avoid me-too posts. Another general rule is that general rules are superceded by specific rules. When the question is a show of support or opposition to a proposal, brief yea/nays from all are acceptable.
The question of what to think of the silence following a substantial post to a list -- was it so good that there was nothing to add, or was it so bad that it was not worth pointing that out? -- is known as "Warnock's Dilemma" after Brian Warnock, who succinctly described it on a perl 6 discussion list in 2000. (ever since I seem to be evangelizing the term, having gotten it listed in Wired Jargon Watch for instance) Warnock's dilemma is very similar, in human behavior terms, to the aspects of human nature that allow all passerby to not intervene in ongoing violence in urban settings, for instance. There's a term for that too but it's been too many years since I took that psychology course. On 11/30/06, Scott Kveton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1. Don't be shy to speak your mind. > > As being one that often floats proposals to the list, I'd encourage people > > to > > voice their opinions even if it is just agreeing with someone else. With > > silence it is hard to know if people agree with you, think you're crazy, > > don't > > care, or haven't read it. > > On the other hand, [posting a "me too"] almost seems like spamming the list -- perl -le'1while(1x++$_)=~/^(11+)\1+$/||print' _______________________________________________ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs