Oskar writes:
> I have found that long letters complaining about the singal to noise > ratio (especially quasi-inflamatory ones that demand replies) seldom > help improve it. I re-read my hastily-hacked-out letter, and you're right, it is somewhat inflammatory. Sorry about that. For reasons I won't go into, I'm somewhat touchy about wanting that subject to be treated very carefully. You don't get a lot of second chances in that realm. > I really don't think 15 or so letters on a single occation is reason > enough to bitch. How many off-topic and/or mis-labelled messages should go by before someone should complain, then? 50? 100? 200? I think 15 off-topic messages is more than enough to merit a "please post elsewhere, or at least re-label the subject" reminder. If 15 is way too low, then what threshold do you suggest? > Anyways, something good came of it since I just made the clients > capable of encrypting the data they write to disk I realize that much good can come from digressions, but consider that the thread all went under the title "my test of 0.3". Since Ian has issued a plea for mass testing, it's hard to ignore a thread under that subject title. If the thread had changed early on to "mr. hard disk, meet mr. thermite", most of us could skip them unread. As Freenet's popularity grows, this problem is going to get worse. It is in the best interest of the project that we keep the all-but-mandatory reading list as concise as possible. I wouldn't care if the list grew to ten times its current size (which is entirely possible) as long as I could confidently filter messages based on their subject line. But that takes some collective discipline, which takes some collective nagging. --Will _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
