No Subject

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Finger syellig@deepthought.dyndns.com for PGP public keys.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mon, 13 Jul 1998, Robert G. Brown wrote:

> I am combining a number of replies into one (longish) message, which will
> give those who don't care only one message to ignore, and will serve as a 
> comprehensive response to those who are interested.
> 
> >Scott Yellig <syellig@klug.armintl.com> Wrote:
> >Man, i leave for a morning, and suddenly theres all this talk about
> >starting a bunch of specific lists, and moderation! :)
> Well, don't go away! :)
> 
> >Personaly, I dont mind getting a lot of email from the group...
> Yeah, me neither, actually, of all the grouping of email that I get, KLUG is
> about the SMALLEST.
> 
> >...One for announceing meeting topics, and one for all the general Geek
> >Chatter....
> I see a need for more, but it hardly matters. If we need two now, you'll
> agree we'll probably need three someday. Part of my claim here is that
> we ought not think in terns of TWO lists (or groups) but of several.
> 
> >As a useful side effect of breaking the list
> >up, we could easily archive the announcement list into something sane, and
> >post it to our web server.
> True enough. I don't see a LOT of value in this, perhaps others do. I would
> prefer to see our own FAQ-list, which could be distilled from the archives.
> 
> >The possible exception that i see is making a list for current group
> >projects ....
> Yeah, it'll depend how long a project lasts.
> 
> >3f. moderation
> >3e. Autosending files to new subscribers (we can send out a FAQ when
> >	people join)
> Which doesn't help existing users when we update a FAQ.
> 
> >3c.Restricting submissions
> 
> All fine. Look, this is a tool. We need to decidewhat we want to do first,
> then we can review this tool (or others) and decide what to do.
> 
> >Contents:
> >---------       1. Creating and removing mailinglists...
> I didn't understand the posting of this (content-free) table of contents.
> 
> >>1. All members of any KLUG mailing list should get stuff sent out via a
> >>   "klug-announce" mailing list.
> >OK.. Im not sure exactly why the current software would not support this.
> I don't know (without reading the manual, not a TOC) what the current soft-
> ware does or does not support, but I do know that I've been on overlapping
> mailing lists numerous times, and got duplicates, which is annoying.
> 
> >Theres a couple way that we could make sure the announcements get to
> >everyone.....
> That's fine, but not quantity, content, and it's not two groups, think 
> multiples...
> 
> >>   I don't know about moderated groups...
> >Im thinking about maybe an announce group where things can be only sent by
> >me (or the listserv user, or whatever)....
> >As far as moderation, my only objection is that I wouldnt want to have to
> >decides who should be heard and who shouldnt. I wouldnt want to have
> >anyone else decide this, either.
> These are conflicting desires. You either have a moderated list (or group),
> or you don't. I think we can all use an announcements mailing list with 
> restraint, so I tend to oppose closed lists unless they're abused.
> 
> In a voluntary group, it is wise not to have ONE person responsible for this, 
> since ONE person goes away, on vacation, drifts away, etc.
> 
> I would like you to consider that there is a number of lists (or groups)
> that we need. I beleive this number is more than two, but considerably less
> than 20 (as someone has suggested). I do not pretend to know that number, but
> if we think in somewhat more general terms, we'll adopt a framework that
> lends itself to this sort of flexibility.
> 
> >>2. I see a lot of traffic that I think of as "newbie Q&A"...
> >IMHO, it WOULD infact push these questions off into the corner, but who
> >knows.
> IMO thhat depends if you're a member of the group or not. Consider that from
> a global standpoint, this whole GROUP is "off in the corner". Perhaps we're
> heading toward a world full of corners, into and out of which people drift
> as needs demand.
> 
> {3 ommitted since Mr. Yellig and this author agree.}
> 
> >>4. On a point related to item 2, it may be useful to develop a local Linux
> >>   FAQ list.....
> >>   Imagine the benefit of a well-run mailing list for new Linux users...
> >Hmm.. as long as armintl doesnt mind paying moveing all the bits around,
> >sure, we can help people all over the world.
> Yes, we can, but I believe that's already being done, and we're probably not 
> going to do it any better.  There's room to develop a local Linux FAQ-list,
> based on the questions that WE see, right here. Our prticular mix of questions,
> issues, and problems, is not handled cleanly by many of the global lists, and 
> they're decentralized and hard for some people to find. KLUG can be a local 
> information source for those who need a boost right away.
> 
> >Bruce Smith <bruce@armintl.com> Wrote:
> >There is another way to do this, that nobody has mentioned yet.
> 
> >We could do away with chatter on the mailing list by running our
> >own news server on the KLUG box.  Keep the mailing list just for
> >announcements (maybe restrict it), and start our own newsgroup(s)
> >to talk about Linux.
> >
> >I personally find a newsgroup easier to read than a mailing list
> >because you can get a list of messages sorted by thread, and nuke
> >threads that are not of interest.  (like going to Gateway! :)
> >
> >Questions, comments, flames . . .  ?
> 
> While reading some of the earlier postings to the list today, I was 
> thinking that this would be a good idea. We do not need to run anything 
> nearly as heavy-duty as INN or DNEWS on our server. I would suggest that
> we use NNTPCACHE, which is the package that Adam and I have used for
> USENET.  I don't know how well we would do woth this, since the server
> box is small, but it is worth a try. NNTPCACHE will also post news, not
> simply download it, so we don't need any of those big time packages, or
> invest a lot more resources, time, money, or masochism.
> 
> Mailing lists are superior to newgroups for some things; group announcements
> being a perfect example. Reminders, by definition, need to be "pushed" to the
> readers, and an announcement mailing list provides it. Newsgroups, web sites,
> are both "pull" items, useful for other things, but not nessesarily as an
> assured way of reaching people in a limited timeframe.
> 
> ANOTHER SOLUTION
> We do have in our midst a couple of representatives for at least a couple of 
> ISPs. Net-Link has had a newsgroup which is called "net-link.linux" for some 
> time. In essence, we could use that newsgroup (which is dormant) for different 
> threads of discussion, and use the KLUG mailing list facility for group
> announcements and organizational matters.  This reduces the load on our little
> server, AND increases the visibility of our technical content. If net-link is
> not able to do this, perhaps some other ISP (Iserve, or ICS) would find them-0
> selves able to do this?
> 
> If some of the ISP people who get this message can comment, it might solve a
> lot of this in a hurry.
> 
>                                                         Regards,
>                                                            ---> RGB <---
>