Re: Musings on debian-user list
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 3:00 AM, Andrei Popescu<andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon,27.Jul.09, 16:53:54, Tim Beauregard wrote:
>> I recently re-subscribed having been off for about four years. The
>> changes I have noticed are:
>>
>> 1. Much less traffic. I previously got 250+ posts per day. Now 50-100.
>> Could this be due to the development of ubuntu?
>
> If you look at the traffic charts you will notice a big decrease after
> some big OT flamewars (anyone remember sponge-bob?). Unfortunately the
> list also lost some good posters then...
>
>> 3. Less digression, and if it occurs, it dies out in a day or two.
>> Previously it could go on for weeks, particularly if a political agenda
>> develops.
>
> See above.
>
>> 5. Less newbie posts. Ubuntu?
>> 6. Less configuration questions. Could this be due to improvement of
>> the kernel and included libraries?
>
> In the 3+ years I've been with Debian I've seen *great* improvements in
> user-friendliness.
I wonder what "user-friendliness" means, sometimes. I'm not claiming
that my posts have always been on-topic/appropriate, but it seems to
me that "friendlieness" has meant (since I've been arround ( . . . not
that long)), treat every question as . . . umm . . good . . .
despite the fact that many questions have been asked before and
discussed, at length (eg, broadcom wifi, install, "how to set up a
wireless network," etc).
In the end, I wonder about this list's tolerance for sarcasm and
"the-basic-pointing-out-of-the-obviousness" ( . . . walked into it,
bring it on . . .). I appreciate other list's sense of humor (can you
guess which one?).
I appreciate the OP's sentiment that the lack of flaming is good . . .
but, a good (hearted) laugh at another's expense is . . . fun . . .
and seems to be discourged/avoided here. Why? What's the problem? A
thick skin is an attribute, not a detrimment.
(my speling suks, sawri)
>
> Regards,
> Andrei
> --
> If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
> (Albert Einstein)
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJKbrAjAAoJEHNWs3jeoi3p7noIAJyFXW49qdt0Bso+iT/rKBo7
> 2hY3WiCyTGTKcIsg2ZlDru6AqtvFFWqfGYeuV0qEIxdTSJRfIrY0ywXobC/bctFN
> lLAxDIVOa4h7anEdt5bdzaISd6WVyesPYPZxhymMRXU7z+T7Qk+usSLzsFhIZvhc
> mxtJuawi78RJocsD7xSICnxY+pn5CyWrPkY/vmm8Md1l9EOGI9GgG67RyErrA6K2
> eXoV6da+GFySQ4LX7i1CEZ1tt6VyIKAl0EDUybo1SmDC0OmsQXg1S6nyOWtUtzpt
> 0QGNVKhhnf7WDHcTrMu7sDyZlndc3Irht6gpx7DC7BKnLcOh9OTeDnBZqlK3r/I=
> =3ZD6
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
Reply to: