Re: Yet another list statistics for debian-project
Andreas Tille <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Mon, 19 Jan 2009, Ben Finney wrote:
> > You conflate low mailing list activity with “activity problems”. At
> > least, that's the best way I can understand your motivation in posting
> > these reports.
> In principle, yes.
That's the premise that you haven't yet explained.
> > If you have a better explanation of what you mean by “activity
> > problems” and what you think the correlation is with mailing list
> > posting, that would help the discussion.
> I started with comparing:
> Here the difference is very clear and the conclusion that Debian
> Junior needs definitely help. Other list show similar decreasing or
> increasing features.
No, that conclusion is not at all clear. All you have demonstrated is
decreasing list traffic.
You have yet to offer any basis for jumping from the observation
“decreasing list traffic” to the inference “project definitely
What other explanations have you entertained, and how have you decided
they're not sufficient? If the answer is “none”, don't you think
it's a bit early to jump directly to a “project is in trouble”
conclusion and post Chicken Little messages to multiple lists?
> I admit that not in all cases my interpretation was correct but if
> some people find arguments that I'm wrong and there is no problem
You're the one making the positive assertion. *Why* do you think the
above inference is so strong that you can say these projects
“definitely need help”?
\ “Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?” “I think so, |
`\ Brain, but what if the hippopotamus won't wear the beach |
_o__) thong?” —_Pinky and The Brain_ |