fsuk-manchester
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Discussion on list (was: the non-free neighbour as


From: MJ Ray
Subject: Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Discussion on list (was: the non-free neighbour asking for help dilemma)
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 14:48:44 +0100
User-agent: Heirloom mailx 12.2 01/07/07

Simon Ward <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 01:43:25PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > -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.

Or just as off-topic, to play it the other way.  I'm disappointed that
this reply focused on the few suggestions I offered, rather than the
general principle of picking a cohesive topic for the list and
sticking with it.  Also, I don't suggest restricting the discussions,
but politely asking them not to explode and maybe chilling them a bit
if they run amok.

> > 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.

Possibly slighly, but at what cost of dividing the community further
and consuming some resources?  Are there any users who would monitor
none of the various other lists and websites that the group could
promise to announce to?

> > 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.

Amongst other things in my last move, the List-Id changed (will break
some people's RFC-compliant email filters) and the archive broke a bit.

Regards,
-- 
MJ Ray (slef)
Webmaster for hire, statistician and online shop builder for a small
worker cooperative http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ http://mjr.towers.org.uk/
(Notice http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html) tel:+44-844-4437-237




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]