I think using the word "rules" might have been a poor choice of words (on my part) :)...I think more so what I was thinking of was guidelines for posting...To that end I think Nick Rout made the best suggestion...ESRs doc on how to ask a question ;) Most Unix Geeks will appreciate that one :)...
Reference: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html On Apr 8, 2005 9:58 AM, Jason Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Martoni ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) scribbled: > > On Apr 8, 2005 1:07 PM, Jason Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Martoni ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) scribbled: > > > > Yeah, rules might be fine. > > > > Will everyone follow them I wonder. > > > > The risk with introducing strict rules for a discussion group (or list) > > > > is > > > > that, IMHO, increases the risk of starting flamewars. > > > > People not expecting one or more, more or less polite pointers to > > > > Google, > > > > f.g.o and whatnot, might easily misunderstand those mails. > > > > > > Please qoute the relevant portions of messages you are replying to. Now > > > I'm left with a sudden tightness in my chest at the thought of a control > > > freak trying to place a bunch of unenforceable rules on the > > > mailinglists. :) > > > > Oh - not to worry. Just people wanting some structure in their lives :) > > > > I suppose I meant to quote this: > > >I think that we should make some rules for the list. > > > > But never got round to it. > > > > My experience is that strictish rules on forums/lists are seen by a number > > of people "to be meant to be violated" - perhaps I've just been on all the > > wrong lists (except Gentoo-users which I've found to be extremely civil in > > comparison to too many).They also tend to bring forth the controll freaks > > raving about enforcment of more or less intelligent rules. :( > > All leading to bandwidth vasting flamewars. > > agreed. Some folks spend too much time inside the computer bubble > (where control is absolute and results are black and white). They then > think the same strict solution-set can be applied to a group of people > from all over the world with different personality types. Isn't it > "When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail"? :) > > There's something to be said for law & order, especially pertaining to > maintenance of a civilized society. However, the assumed caveat is that > the laws (rules, here) are enforceable. If there are no means to > effectively enforce a rule, then the presence of the rule (and > half-assed attempts to enforce it) are worse than no rule. > > Say there were rules on this list, and someone broke one (eg I said > "ass" above, oops, I did it again :) ). What could we do? blacklist > the email address? Anyone got a gmail invite? We haven't stopped the > _person_ from posting, just forced them to use a different account. And > now they want to make a point. Well, that's just peachy. We just made > the problem worse. > > With the current setup, annoyances pop up, are mostly ignored, then fade > out. Effective deployment of the delete key is the best defense, IMO. > An MUA (like mutt) that threads mail and allows for the deletion of > entire threads with one keystroke is even better. > </soapbox> > > just my $0.02 > > Cooper. > > -- > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list > > -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
