And I agree that this will go on. My message sprang out of what Paul said,
that he might split the general networking from the Professional group, and
I agree with Priscilla that all are better served if they stay together. I
think if anything should get split out it should be work related stuff. Then
at least we would have an appropriate place to point them.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Larrieu"
To: "Donald B Johnson jr" ;
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 10:41 AM
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
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=16587&t=16217
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
