Great idea Torrie, I think this is very needed. You also think adding policy
or wiki-updates as a topic?
On Thursday, November 28, 2013 12:36 AM, Torrie Fischer
<tdfisc...@hackerbots.net> wrote:
Yes I'm digging up this thread.
On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 15:52:35 Chris Egeland wrote:
> Hey hackers!
>
> I've been watching the mailing lists very closely for some time now, and
> have noticed a general uptrend in the volume of email sent to the
> discuss list. Sometimes we get offtopic and go off on tangents about
> toast, or other topics which are fun to talk about, but are ultimately
> irrelevant to the space itself. Usually, this isn't a problem, but for
> someone who is interested in the space, but not the minutiae of every
> little bit of day-to-day operations, it can quickly turn into an
> overwhelming amount of email.
>
> Today, I'm asking for input on how we should proceed with the mailing
> lists. As you may know, we currently have 5 lists, two of which are
> public, one semipublic, and two private. discuss@synhak.org and
> annou...@synhak.org are the two that everyone knows about. Members may
> know that they are automatically subscribed to memb...@synhak.org.
> Board members are subscribed to bo...@synhak.org and us sysadmin folk
> are members of sysad...@synhak.org.
>
> My recommendation is to create an "offtopic" list, which would have very
> very lax rules on what can be posted. Anything you want to chat about.
> Want to debate why the RubberDucks is a terrible team name and the Aeros
> was WAY better? Sure, no problem. Got a pothole on Market street that
> irks you every day? Have at it. Joke threads? Toast? No problem. The
> other side to this idea is that the discuss list would have some basic
> rules imposed that mean that any topics to the discuss list would be
> required to be relevant to the space itself. Projects occurring at the
> space would be relevant topics, open hours discussion, meeting minutes, etc.
How about instead of a catch-all off-topic list, some more specialized lists?
Almost every time I send a rapid-fire set of emails, I do wonder about the
people who were previously complaining about the very high volume of e-mails.
This isn't about off-topicness, but more about "what is on-topic for
discuss@". General purpose discussion sounds pretty neat, but then I wonder
what effects having more focused discussion groups would have on giving
incentive to people to discuss more.
I've been wondering if it would benefit the space at all to create a couple of
smaller lists for people involved in certain standing projects at the space,
mostly according to the Maintainers[1] page. Namely,
* Expanding access to sysadmin@ to the public, redirecting services@ to a new
security@ list, and writing down the ad-hoc policy we've been using to give
people access to security tokens
* A speakers-bureau@ list for better coordination of the bureau
* little-aristotles@ for planing that
* startup-akron@ if you're interested in helping Nick and I get a startup
environment up off the ground in Akron.
Expanding access to sysadmin@ should benefit the space by allowing interested
persons to sign up for it and tune in to more rapid discussions about
networking or servers that most people really couldn't care less about. Same
for the other lists. In addition, they'd give a better idea of who are the
real maintainers of things. Someone sends a question to the speakers-bureau
list and you'll hear back from someone with a vested interest as opposed to
any yahoo signed up on discuss@.
Creating a little-aristotles list would also enable that group to include
external organizations that *really* could care less about discussions and
meeting minutes.
In essence, this would transform the SYNHAK mailing lists from a SYNHAK-
centric discussion tool into a venerable hub of many discussions for the
greater Akron Hacker community. I think this is needed.
Your thoughts and feedback are appreciated.
>
> So, let me know what you guys think. I'm not officially proposing this,
> but we may chat about it at the next meeting as a discussion topic,
> because it would fundamentally mean we change how the mailing lists are
> organized and structured.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
>
[1]http://synhak.org/wiki/Maintainers
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@synhak.org
https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@synhak.org
https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
