North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
RE: time for a new list?
I don't believe that a ceiling on number of posts is a solution at all. When an issue occurs that requires, or at least RATES discussion, it would stifle effective communication. I disagree with taking all issues offline to private email as well. While I can see where it would dramatically decrease the number of messages on the list of we did so and then submitted one email with "notes" of the discussion, it will also stifle communication. Not everyone is going to pipe when they see the first or even third email on a subject. Suggestions and opinions often require some thought after reading through the thread and though some might think of the thread as idle chatter over some issue they have no interest in, others find it interesting and even educational. >At 11:57 PM 11/2/98 -0700, Forrest W. Christian wrote: > >Assuming we can't agree on what is valid and what is not - then how about a >list where a user can only post 5 messages per month? If you need to post >more than 5 messages a month to NANOG - then there is something wrong. This >would eliminate the "I said, you said" flame wars between antagonists. If >some emergency came along where one had to post more than 5 a month, they >would have to approach merit anf justify why this month is an exception. >The number 5 can be 3 or 7 for that matter. The only question is the list >serving technology (majordomo, listserv, etc.). If it is able to handle >such a function (or easily modified), we might be able to cut down on the >noise a bit. > >-Hank ------- John Fraizer | __ _ The System Administrator | / / (_)__ __ ____ __ | The choice mailto:John.Fraizer@EnterZone.Net | / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / | of a GNU http://www.EnterZone.Net/ | /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ | Generation A 486 is a terrible thing to waste...