Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Discussion on list (was: the non-free neighbour asking for help dilemma)

[Simon Ward]

On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 01:43:25PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Simon Ward <address@hidden> wrote:
> > The list is for discussion, and this discussion isn’t going in circles,
> > or getting agressive, and I wouldn’t consider it off topic.
> 
> The topic is current set as "This is a local list for local people.
> We'll have no trouble here!" so the discussion about a Manchester
> person was fine.  Maybe the complaint was the only off-topic bit?
> 
> Seriously, the current list topic is stupid and should be fixed.

Thank you for pointing that out.  That isn’t what it says on the FSUK
groups page[1], by the way.

[1]: http://savannah.nongnu.org/mail/?group=fsuk

> > How about moving to two lists?
> >   * fsuk-manchester-announce - announcements; [...]
> >   * fsuk-manchester-discuss - general discussion on free software and
> >     related issues.  Essentially what fsuk-manchester is now.
> 
> -1 I think fsuk-manchester should be kept to discussing activities
> supporting free software in Manchester and the general discussion
> which has sprung up here should be redirected to a more general list
> like manlug or fsfe-uk or address@hidden or GNU's misc

manlug isn’t a suitable list.  The fsuk-manchester list was created
because discussion on the issues we are interested in was “excessively
moderated”, and anyone attempting to continue discussion got abuse,
mainly anti- free software and anti-GNU hurled at them.

fsfe-uk may well be a good place for discussions to go, but I don’t
think fsuk-manchester should be restricted to not having them.  General
discussion just as appropriate to fsuk-manchester as it is to fsfe-uk.

> discussion list.  Announcements should be sent clearly labelled as
> ANNOUNCE to relevant lists, including fsuk-manchester, fsfe-uk, cola
> and whatever else, and posted to/linked from the group's website.

That would be nice if Mailman allowed users to create filters to prevent
mails that users do not want to receive from being sent to them in the
first place.  It’s simply more flexible for the users to have separate
lists.

> and too focused to be worth the disruption.  Yes, disruption: Mailman
> (which hosts this list) does not support list migration well.)

I’ve never had trouble, but then I’ve never had to migrate large lists.

Simon
-- 
Email: address@hidden | Jabber ID: address@hidden
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved
from a simple system that works. -- John Gaule

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature