From: "Jill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I am in full agreement with Julian- that is what I was trying to express
in
> my post yesterday but I think I was too aggravated to do it coherently.
>
> It is possible to deal with all topics effectively right here, and I
agree
> that the unilateral action was inappropriate. That is my vote.
>
Good and thoughtful points, Jill, except I disagree that a unilateral
experiment was inappropriate. You do not have to subscribe to SocialGML.
Only time will tell you whether you should.
Let me point out a couple things supported by scientific data (which you
would understand if I had any, because of your professional studies).
** As Julian says, people interested in gerbils approach them from many
directions. More people are interested in gerbils (yay!) so the diversity
of keepers also has spread.
** To simplify, I use terms like "expert", and "information" vs.
"socializing". It's much more complicated than that, of course. Let me
invent new terms: "pure expert" vs. "pure petowner and social person".
Both are in the gerbils community, and both are responsible for the care
of animals -- which after all, might be the most important thing.
** GML has grown, but not as rapidly as gerbils can reproduce. (*smile*)
** More diverse gerbils interests appear in GML.
** GML beautifully serves the people who find that GML serves them well.
(Please think what I just said.)
** You and I are in the middle population of gerbildom's humans.
Julian's Charter and Guidelines serve us very well.
** But you and I do not represent the extremes toward "pure expert" or
"pure social person".
** Data shows that pure experts become dissatisfied and either leave GML
or stop writing very often. IMHO, without the experts GML loses its
principal reason for being -- talking about gerbils and their care and
breeding.
** Data shows that people often unsubscribe from GML. I guess that their
needs aren't being met.
** Data shows that pure social persons also are frustrated. They want to
share their personal happiness or sadness with everyone, but GML today
cannot support all that traffic and it would become worse if GML grows.
** So you and I might be satisfied, but people at "extremes" are not.
** IMHO GML is a model of the best kind of (international) Web community.
I think nobody wants to drive away other gerbils lovers. GML has nice
informal processes for shaping itself -- and sometimes for healing
itself.
So IMHO, GML can stand pat and continue to hope everyone can crowd into
the middle like us. Or GML can sponsor a parallel email list with a
different emphasis, to see if a wider range of gerbils interests can be
served.
... Bill
Save the GGMLEs!
