I've answered a number of troubleshooting questions. I do appreciate it if
the questioner posts the final outcome to the group. Then it becomes a
learning experience. Many do not. Flames to them.
Each of us is free to reply or not to design questions.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Larrieu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 1:31 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Associate and Professional Email Lists [7:16217]
>
>
> Not that I disagree, Don, but this has been a source of
> annoyance for many
> folks for as long as I've been on the list ( around 2 years. )
>
> two points:
>
> 1) sometimes some of these work related scenarios provide
> good learning
> points
>
> 2) people ask these kinds of questions on all the lists, no
> matter what. The
> CCIE list would get it's fair share of this kind of question as well.
>
> without having the list 100% moderated, with all messages
> being reviewed,
> there is no practical way to stop this. and sometimes there
> is something to
> be learned that is applicable to one's studies.
>
> Chuck
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Donald B Johnson jr
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 9:09 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Associate and Professional Email Lists [7:16217]
>
>
> I think that if there is a split, all these questions
> concerning work should
> be split out. It is supposed to be about group study not
> group consulting.
> Over the time that I have been here there seems to be a
> growing number of
> narrowly worded questions to bail someone out at work, and
> this individual
> doesn't even seem to consult CCO most of the time, even
> though they are
> supporting a Cisco platform. The culture here seems to
> support and highly
> respect the intellectual property of others, which I
> whole-heartedly agree,
> but it shows a lack of respect for those who consult for a living. I
> personally like giving "so called flames" to people who are
> looking for free
> consulting work to hide there apparent laziness. Just like
> everyone chimes
> in when someone comes here and tries to sell certzone labs
> gets blasted. I
> wish that blatant " my boss wants me to set up a central
> frame hub and six
> spoke network what should I do" should get blasted or pointed
> to place where
> people can consult for food. Paul any e-mail that has boss in
> it should get
> an automated stock reply, check CCO, call cisco, buy gear,
> have cisco SE set
> it up, have a nice day. Now I know people are going to say
> that this is how
> they learn by posting real world questions and this is true
> but it is the
> blatant ones that I am talking about. Oh and keep this in
> mind that the
> people answering the these so called learning experiences
> didn't just know
> the answer, at some point they had to check CCO, contact
> Cisco, buy gear,
> work with Cisco SE, have a nice day.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Priscilla Oppenheimer"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 7:40 PM
> Subject: Re: Associate and Professional Email Lists [7:16217]
>
>
> > When I go on vaction I unsubscribe and then subscribe
> again. Would all my
> > messages go in the moderator's queue when I subscribed
> again? That would
> be
> > annoying for the moderator (and for me. ;-) Other than
> that, I think it's
> a
> > good idea to have messages from a new subscriber go through
> the moderator
> > for a while. As I'm sure you have considered, it's not a
> very "scalable"
> > idea, though.
> >
> > I hope you don't divide the group again. The general
> networking questions
> > are helpful to those studying for CCNP and CCDP. The
> diversity of messages
> > (except for the flames, of course) are good for learning
> and represent the
> > real world better than if we just got questions about
> passing scores, etc.
> >
> > Thanks again for all you do for us!
> >
> > Priscilla
> >
> > At 12:02 PM 8/17/01, Paul Borghese wrote:
> > >With an open group, you are going to have your share of noise.
> Everyone's
> > >ides of noise is different. For example, to many this
> very e-mail is
> noise
> > >because it is not directly on subject.
> > >
> > >But there are some things we can do to help lessen the
> noise. They are
> on
> > >my to-do list, just have been too busy.:
> > >
> > >1. Comprehensive FAQ - we need a new faq that can answer
> the questions
> that
> > >are asked over and over again.
> > >
> > >2. Split out the professional group from the general
> networking group.
> > >
> > >3. Setup a system where new users can not post directly to
> the group -
> This
> > >is the most difficult of the three ideas and will require
> substantial
> > >coding. What I want is to have a system where when an
> e-mail arrives (or
> > >from the newsfeed or website), if the poster has not been
> approved, it
> gets
> > >bounced into the moderators queue. If the moderator
> (actually we will
> have
> > >many) agrees that the message is appropriate, the
> moderator will allow
> the
> > >message to pass. Plus if the moderator feels that the poster will
> continue
> > >to send interesting and valuable e-mails, the moderator
> can place the
> user
> > >in the "automatic approval" category so future e-mails
> will not need to
> be
> > >approved. The goal is to bounce new messages from first
> time posters,
> but
> > >allow the old-timers to post without moderation. Thus
> filtering the new
> > >user asking inappropriate questions and the occasional spam.
> > >
> > >Take care,
> > >
> > >Paul
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "John Neiberger"
> > >To:
> > >Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 6:05 PM
> > >Subject: Re: Associate and Professional Email Lists [7:16217]
> > >
> > >
> > > > Yes, Paul did do a good job cutting down that traffic.
> I just noticed
> > > > that in the last month or so there has been a slew of
> *really* basic
> > > > questions that can be answered in the first two or
> three chapters of
> any
> > > > decent CCNA study guide or by a 30 second search on CCO.
> > > >
> > > > I certainly don't mind answering these types of
> questions, I was just
> > > > concerned that the purpose of the two separate lists was being
> > > > undermined, causing a lot of unnecessary traffic. To me it's no
> > > > different than posting jobs on the Associate or
> Professional lists.
> It
> > > > may reach some of the right people, but it's not the
> appropriate place
> > > > to post that type of information.
> > > >
> > > > >>> "Tom Lisa" 8/15/01 3:19:55 PM >>>
> > > > Yes, John, there is an Associate list. We have a
> similar problem
> > > > there as well. People keep insisting on asking CCNP/CCIE level
> > > > questions on that list.
> > > >
> > > > However, people being the way they are, I doubt we will ever
> > > > solve the problem completely. But, you got to admit that Paul
> > > > at least cut down on the volume of CCNA level traffic
> on this list.
> > > >
> > > > Prof. Tom Lisa, CCAI
> > > > Community College of Southern Nevada
> > > > Cisco Regional Networking Academy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > John Neiberger wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Excuse me for this rant. I'm not trying to be the
> content cop, I
> > > > just
> > > > wanted to make an observation.
> > > >
> > > > Do we no longer have an Associate list as well as the
> Professional
> > > > list? We've been getting horrendous numbers of
> emails lately that
> > > > simply do not belong on this list. If you don't know
> how to connect
> > > > a
> > > > PC to a router using the console cable or how to
> connect two routers
> > > > back-to-back, it seems to me that you should ask
> those types of
> > > > questions on the CCNA-level list, not the CCNP-level list.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not intending to come down too hard on people asking these
> > > > questions, I'm just asking that you post to the
> appropriate list.
> > > > The
> > > > Associate mailing list is intended for the simpler
> questions, while
> > > > the
> > > > Professional list is intended for those with slighly
> more advanced
> > > > questions. I understand that we tend to grant a
> *lot* of leeway
> > > > when
> > > > it
> > > > comes to subject matter, but the level of the
> question should still
> > > > be
> > > > appropriate to the list it's posted to.
> > > >
> > > > Okay, enough ranting. :-) Back to our regular
> programming....
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > John
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > ________________________
> >
> > Priscilla Oppenheimer
> > http://www.priscilla.com
> Report misconduct
> and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=16584&t=16217
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
