[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Volume on -devel



On Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 01:40:10PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> The results: of 1596 postings, 1158 were from developers, 438 were not.
> 
> These are the top posters amoung non-developers:
> 
>      40 no: Navindra Umanee <navindra@cs.mcgill.ca>

This guy's in my killfile anyway.  He's either a troll or a moron, either
way he should go back to being an anonymous coward on slashdot.

The rest of the non-developers you listed have each made a net positive
contribution to discussions on this list.  So an outright ban on
non-developer traffic seems to me a bit harsh.

> For comparison, the top posters amoung the developers:
> 
>      61 yes: Joseph Carter

*COUGH* *COUGH* *COUGH*

Knghtbrd is a likeable enough guy, but man, does he ever have a staggering
penchant for yammering.  I mean, consider the above in addition to his
highly visible and vocal presence on the Debian IRC channel(s).

>      36 yes: Wichert Akkerman

Good to see.  Thanks, Wichert, for not being an "invisible" leader.

>      24 yes: Branden Robinson

I myself am in the top ten.  Hmm, perhaps I should show more restraint.  Of
course, several of my mails were, I think, ascerbic one-liners which eat up
less real estate than long, rambling quasi-essays.

> Well I don't know what conclusion to draw from all this. :-) If the problem
> is that we get lots of clueless posts from lots of different people, closing
> the list off might be the right solution. If on the other hand, we're
> getting lots of clueless posts from only a few people, perhaps those people
> should be taken aside and spoken too.

Dare I suggest moderation?  Of course, that's impossible because no one
would volunteer to do it.  :)

-- 
G. Branden Robinson              |    Never underestimate the power of human
Debian GNU/Linux                 |    stupidity.
branden@ecn.purdue.edu           |    -- Robert Heinlein
cartoon.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgpsniL3ClxBi.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: