[Freedombox-discuss] Creating Mailing Lists
On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 10:41:25AM +1000, Weaver wrote:
> >
> > This is the last message I want to see about the details of logos and
> > aesthetics. And I bet I'm not the only one.
>
> Quite possibly not, but this is easily fixed in the header.
No, it isn't.
> Then these are just deleted as any other thread of little interest to
> *that particular list member* is.
I demand that every list member is to jump on one foot while wearing underwear
on your head and singing your national anthem. I can do it, I see no reason
why you all can't -- all to accomodate me, of course.
> I think that creating a separate list destroys the value of the open
> source potential. Every now and again, the least interested person
Those who care, will match their subscriptions. Those who don't, won't.
> might contribute something of value. Some more and some even more than
> that. Little point in dividing what is stronger as a combined effort.
Look, you just ask that everybody will match *your* expectations, now
you're expecting the exact opposite? I'm sensing some mixed signals,
there. Try for some consistency in your expectations.
> Look at the Debian lists. It has a dedicated 'firewall' list for
> example, but most of the discussion on firewalls takes place on
> Debian-user, because that's the one all the sys. admins. are subscribed
> to, predominantly.
>
> What is a pain is subscribing to half a dozen different lists to keep
So you won't subscribe to a mailing list -- which is an *once* event,
yet you expect hundreds to thousand readers to *each* read a message,
*then* deciding whether it fits their interests, *every* fucking time?
If you're that unreasonable, I wonder how unreasonable your opinions
elsewhere are going to be.
> tabs on what is going on. Or arriving at the end, or end of a stage, of
> of a project, seeing things you think could have been done better, but
> had no input at the appropriate time.
>
> The strength of open source is accessible community.
> Fragmented division is the conventional and already failed
> structure - rather obvious when you look around and it doesn't
> produce the same product as the one that is the result of a
> continuous, open consultative process.
You'd rather have technical people leave, and the verbal fluffers
remain, do you?
--
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
Reply to: