A sincere request- for sanity.
This list has some history. And if it continues on the present course it will be a history with no future. We all have some very valuable to a Linux list questions and answers. On Linux related matters. This is my quite on topic as it goes to operations of the list polite statement.' IF you agree- keep posting your valuable to Linux matters best. If you do not agree. go into your bathroom- close the door- and scream defiance at the mirror.Where you will see a person. a person who seems to think the concept Linux USER'S Group means forum for other things -- Oren Beck 816.729.3645
On Friday 15 August 2008, Oren Beck wrote:
We all have some very valuable to a Linux list questions and answers. On Linux related matters.
If you do not agree. go into your bathroom- close the door- and scream defiance at the mirror.Where you will see a person. a person who seems to think the concept Linux USER'S Group means forum for other things
Exactly, this is a group of Linux users. That does not exclude other topics from discussion, provided those discussing them are Linux users.
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 12:15 AM, Luke -Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
Exactly, this is a group of Linux users. That does not exclude other topics from discussion, provided those discussing them are Linux users.
I must say, Luke, that I am troubled by your response to efforts to contain the off topic hcatter on this list, particularly since you are often a party to egging on the off-topic flamewars. Like you I want to avoid the strictest form of moderation, where no off-topic discussion is allowed. But it sounds like you would have us live with almost no guidelines at all, and I fear that the flamewars you've helped prepetuate convince me that we must excercise some control on this list, even if it is largely self control. Let me suggest to all on the list that perhaps it is time to start talking about some principles we might use to guide our own behavior on the list. First, I'd say that any reasonable system of ethics should govern interactions between different parties is such a way that each party is offer some protected from the excesses of the other parties. I think we've seen examples of excess in recent discussions on this list. While we might have varying opinions about how much departure from the list's topics is permissible, surely most of us can agree that unlimited departures are not wwhat we want to see. Second, I want to suggest a specific limit that we might all consider following in our participation in this list. While some off-topic discussion could be acceptable, perhaps each of us could try to insure that the amount of off-topic list bandwidth we use does not exceed the amount of on-topic list bandwidth we use. Any thoughts on this? Adrian
On 8/16/08 8:59 AM, "Adrian Griffis" <adriang63@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 12:15 AM, Luke -Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
Exactly, this is a group of Linux users. That does not exclude other topics from discussion, provided those discussing them are Linux users.
I must say, Luke, that I am troubled by your response to efforts to contain the off topic hcatter on this list, particularly since you are often a party to egging on the off-topic flamewars. Like you I want to avoid the strictest form of moderation, where no off-topic discussion is allowed. But it sounds like you would have us live with almost no guidelines at all, and I fear that the flamewars you've helped prepetuate convince me that we must excercise some control on this list, even if it is largely self control.
Let me suggest to all on the list that perhaps it is time to start talking about some principles we might use to guide our own behavior on the list. First, I'd say that any reasonable system of ethics should govern interactions between different parties is such a way that each party is offer some protected from the excesses of the other parties. I think we've seen examples of excess in recent discussions on this list. While we might have varying opinions about how much departure from the list's topics is permissible, surely most of us can agree that unlimited departures are not wwhat we want to see.
Second, I want to suggest a specific limit that we might all consider following in our participation in this list. While some off-topic discussion could be acceptable, perhaps each of us could try to insure that the amount of off-topic list bandwidth we use does not exceed the amount of on-topic list bandwidth we use.
Any thoughts on this?
We went through this just a few months ago, when we reenacted the 30 Years War through the list. The consensus was that the list works as it is. Free Software advocates have a tendency to be as passionate about freedom in all parts of their lives. Therefore, it is neither unusual or unduly alarming to see those opinions expressed here. Frankly, I find it refreshing, even when I am on the receiving end. Nearly every keyboard has a delete key installed, and unsubscribing is not difficult to do if the heat is too high in the kitchen. Matthew Copple mcopple@kcopensource.org
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Matthew Copple <mcopple@kcopensource.org> wrote:
On 8/16/08 8:59 AM, "Adrian Griffis" <adriang63@gmail.com> wrote:
Second, I want to suggest a specific limit that we might all consider following in our participation in this list. While some off-topic discussion could be acceptable, perhaps each of us could try to insure that the amount of off-topic list bandwidth we use does not exceed the amount of on-topic list bandwidth we use.
Any thoughts on this?
We went through this just a few months ago, when we reenacted the 30 Years War through the list. The consensus was that the list works as it is.
Mr. Copple, I don't think the word consensus means what you think it means. 8-) Adrian
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 8:59 AM, Adrian Griffis <adriang63@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 12:15 AM, Luke -Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
Exactly, this is a group of Linux users. That does not exclude other topics from discussion, provided those discussing them are Linux users.
I must say, Luke, that I am troubled by your response to efforts to contain the off topic hcatter on this list, particularly since you are often a party to egging on the off-topic flamewars. Like you I want to avoid the strictest form of moderation, where no off-topic discussion is allowed. But it sounds like you would have us live with almost no guidelines at all, and I fear that the flamewars you've helped prepetuate convince me that we must excercise some control on this list, even if it is largely self control.
Let me suggest to all on the list that perhaps it is time to start talking about some principles we might use to guide our own behavior on the list. First, I'd say that any reasonable system of ethics should govern interactions between different parties is such a way that each party is offer some protected from the excesses of the other parties. I think we've seen examples of excess in recent discussions on this list. While we might have varying opinions about how much departure from the list's topics is permissible, surely most of us can agree that unlimited departures are not wwhat we want to see.
Second, I want to suggest a specific limit that we might all consider following in our participation in this list. While some off-topic discussion could be acceptable, perhaps each of us could try to insure that the amount of off-topic list bandwidth we use does not exceed the amount of on-topic list bandwidth we use.
Any thoughts on this?
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 8:59 AM, Adrian Griffis <adriang63@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 12:15 AM, Luke -Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
Exactly, this is a group of Linux users. That does not exclude other topics from discussion, provided those discussing them are Linux users.
I must say, Luke, that I am troubled by your response to efforts to contain the off topic hcatter on this list, particularly since you are often a party to egging on the off-topic flamewars. Like you I want to avoid the strictest form of moderation, where no off-topic discussion is allowed. But it sounds like you would have us live with almost no guidelines at all, and I fear that the flamewars you've helped prepetuate convince me that we must excercise some control on this list, even if it is largely self control.
Let me suggest to all on the list that perhaps it is time to start talking about some principles we might use to guide our own behavior on the list. First, I'd say that any reasonable system of ethics should govern interactions between different parties is such a way that each party is offer some protected from the excesses of the other parties. I think we've seen examples of excess in recent discussions on this list. While we might have varying opinions about how much departure from the list's topics is permissible, surely most of us can agree that unlimited departures are not wwhat we want to see.
Second, I want to suggest a specific limit that we might all consider following in our participation in this list. While some off-topic discussion could be acceptable, perhaps each of us could try to insure that the amount of off-topic list bandwidth we use does not exceed the amount of on-topic list bandwidth we use.
Any thoughts on this?
It has been suggested on IRC that a moderated mailing list be set up, alongside a kclug-social mailing list for offtopic things. The problem is simple: there are hundreds of subscribers too this mailing list. If your mail isn't relevant to their declared interest (Linux) then it's likely to be marked spam, to the detriment of all traffic originating from KCLUG mailing lists. More importantly, a tiny minority are responsible for the bulk of the traffic. I discovered that filtering out one specific person reduced traffic by about half. You can probably do even more detailed analysis if you're feeling mean. This either an attempt to waste people's time, or, more likely, the end result of many people blocking this guy. If fewer people are paying attention to you, make up for it in volume, I suppose. I could continue filtering people like this; many of us could continue filtering people we feel not worth paying attention to. But it creates an invisible line in the community that isn't known to outsiders and new members. By ignoring the problem, it festers until it reaches critical mass (re: stupid congressman bullshit or any given posting style debate). If a clear line was established and enforced, I think the Linux User's Group would be healthier overall. I don't intend this to be directed at specific people, but I do want to send a message of acceptable behavior to a small minority who doesn't seem to get it or care for it. It's also to remind the rest of us, who occasionally fall into these traps, what to do instead. My suggested simple guidelines to keep discussion relevant and productive: DO: * Be respectful. We're all interested in similar outcomes, and expression of a diversity of opinions is healthy, but don't let differences of opinion in the small or large details turn into personal attack. * Be considerate. No amount of debate will change a person's fundamental beliefs, whether it be as minor as which text editor is best, or as major as whom to worship. * Share problems. Interesting problems can require interesting solutions, and the community as a whole can learn from what works and what doesn't. * Be helpful. Linux is used in a variety of places; even experts in one field can become lost in another. * Share projects. If you have a Linux related project for a hobby (or job), please share it with us! You might just find a few willing local collaborators ready to pitch in. * Share your interest in Linux. A certain level of mistrust of a proprietary software company is healthy, but what we all have in common is the use of Free software, rather than a hate of closed software. It needn't be all technical; political discussion is fine, so long as it's pertinent to the use and development of Linux. Please keep in mind this is a first draft. Suggested additions, removals and changes are welcome! Justin Dugger P.S. Sorry if this hits the list multiple times -- I got some wierd errors.
A Cartoon Explaining The KCLUG "Loss Of Sanity" http://xkcd.com/386/ Just read the cartoon. All will be explained. ;-) P.S. If you had never heard of XKCD before, the cartoon should have honorary KCLUG "On Topic" status. --- On Fri, 8/15/08, Oren Beck <orenbeck@gmail.com> wrote:
This list has some history. And if it continues on the present course it will be a history with no future.
We all have some very valuable to a Linux list questions and answers. On Linux related matters.
This is my quite on topic as it goes to operations of the list polite statement.'
IF you agree- keep posting your valuable to Linux matters best.
If you do not agree. go into your bathroom- close the door-and scream defiance at the mirror. Where you will see a person. a person who seems to think the concept Linux USER'S Group means forum for other things
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 3:14 AM, Leo Mauler <webgiant@yahoo.com> wrote:
A Cartoon Explaining The KCLUG "Loss Of Sanity"
Just read the cartoon. All will be explained. ;-)
"Are you coming to bed?" "No, I'm busy" "What is it?" "Someone is /wrong/ on the internet." very funny. There was this guy who set up, I think it was the KC Clay Guild -- this story was from Mike Morgan -- as an anarchist collective. He left town for a few years and when he got back he was very alarmed that his anarchist collective was not operating as he had intended it to. His organization was only anarchist as long as he was in charge of it. -- "don't let the perfect become the enemy of the good" -- some politician on CNN
participants (7)
-
Adrian Griffis -
David Nicol -
Justin Dugger -
Leo Mauler -
Luke -Jr -
Matthew Copple -
Oren Beck