Regarding the splitting up of mailing lists

[bob@xxxxxxx]

A couple of people have pointed out that there is too much traffic on the KLUG 
mailing list, and it's been a cause for some people dropping off the list. A 
split in the list has been suggested, and on the whole, it's a good idea. If we 
can support robust activity on more than one mailing list, it's a good sign
that people are interested, and that the group is growing in depth, not merely 
in numbers.  My only note of caution is that we think ahead a little, maintain a
sense of togetherness, and perhaps try to anticipate what will happen if we try 
to divide the list even further. Some impressions:

1. All members of any KLUG mailing list should get stuff sent out via a
   "klug-announce" mailing list. If we don't do this, we can quickly lose
   group-wide communication.

   Existing software might not support this; we would not want anyone to get
   multiple copies of the same message. However, I'm not as concerned about
   the features/limitations of the software as I am about the idea of making
   sure everyone is informed about group events. Surely we can change the 
   software to comply with our needs.

   I don't know about moderated groups. They're fine, but they are a commitment
   for the moderator, depending on traffic load. Moderation works well for some
   USENET groups, but such groups rarely have threads of discussion, the moder-
   ator becomes too involved in editing at that point. Two that come to mind are
   COLA and comp.risks, and neither exist for "discussion".

2. I see a lot of traffic that I think of as "newbie Q&A". While we're splitting
   up into groups, we might want to consider a "klug-sartup" mailing list for 
   these threads. People who want to answer these questions can then do so, but
   into a group that really wants to see these answers.

   I don't want to push these issues off into the corner; quite the opposite,
   if we have a lot of this type of activity, we can channel it better, and
   build a mailing list that has focus.

3. I would suspect that as we develop more organization, we'll have mailing 
   lists that deal with projects as well as necessary organizational stuff.
   There's no need to clutter up a central mailing list with messages that
   only a subset of volunteers or project workers will need to see.

4. On a point related to item 2, it may be useful to develop a local Linux
   FAQ list. Before you say "OH NO, Not ANOTHER Linux FAQ!", think about it
   a little bit. Many of the questions asked by people new to Linux are NOW
   ALREADY ANSWERED on existing Linux FAQ lists, and in USENET, so why do we
   get these questions at all?  The answer is simple; people who are new to
   Linux aren't yet geared to handle many of these sources of information,
   which is its very own kind of learning curve.

   Imagine the benefit of a well-run mailing list for new Linux users, com-
   plete with its own FAQ, handled and modified according to the questions
   we actually see here. This kind of mailing list would serve as a great
   forum for all kinds of problems, and would serve to help steady people
   as they become for familiar with Linux.

5. If we split the mailing list up into two (or more) groups, would the people 
   who have departed come back?

   I ask this question, hoping that any of those who read this message can
   contact them, and at least inform them that a split has taken place. We
   might see if these folks stick around in one of the resulting groups,
   given that there's less traffic there.

What is our goal in building more mailing lists? If its to minimize the 
amount a mail a few people get (so they don't drop out), it doesn't sound
like the right choice. I've seen the term "spam" used, and so far I have seen no
spam on this mailing list (spam isn't mail that doesn't turn you on, you know), 
so that's not an issue. If people want LESS content, they can delete messages 
without reading them, or drop out. We're not in the business of dumbing down 
anything, or providing less content.

HOWEVER, If we're doing this in order to improve our focus in areas of interest,
it's a good thing, mostly by promoting focus without annoying anyone who's not 
interested. Let's do this with our eyes open, and to become more effective. We 
don't have to act on all of these suggestions at once, but we can keep them in 
mind as we continue to grow and diversify.

                                                                Regards,
                                                                ---> RGB <---