First of all, let me say that the discussion-wiki-page is quite "ripping sentences from the context".
On 01/27/2006 08:59 PM Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > "unless such a forum is bi-directionally gated to e.g. this mailing-list, it > will only cause a split in the community" What the one could have meant is that there is only a limited umber of experts. And forum+mailinglist might be too much for this limited number. Maybe he meant that. > "if there is a web forum and there is a very low concentration of "experts" > in > there, what's the point of it ?" > > If there is a mailing list, and there is a very low concentration of > "experts" > on it, whats the point of it? I'm sorry, but I don't think this is something > that could qualify as a reason against a forum. There are experts here, but will they move to the new forum? Or where will the mods/admins/advanced user for the forum will come from? > "if there is no "moderation" or guidance, a forum wont work" > > I'm sorry... this one I just don't get at all. Of course there would be > administrators & moderators... its a crucial forum element. Yeah, of course it is crucial. I guess this quote is quite a bit out of the context. And it was more of a "when doing a forum may I remind you of these tasks" then a " why not to do a forum". What I meant was: You need people who get admins/mods/whatever. There are a lot of people on the lists, and there might be enough around, but you have to find them. OJ -- Microsoft isn't the answer. Microsoft is the question, and the answer is NO. (Unbekannt)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
