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

Re: No goals, selective memory, be nice, red nose day

On 2004-08-23 00:32:01 +0100 Ricardo Mones <mones@aic.uniovi.es> wrote:

MJ Ray <mjr@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
If we start from the assumption that -women subscribers in part want to remedy some problem of debian lists,
Well, the problem is of Debian in general, not only of the lists, so this
is a weak assumption.

Of course. There's little enough collated evidence yet of any particular problem with the lists, let alone with debian in general. All we have so far here is an incongruous demographic and a lot of people putting forward pet theories with energetic handwaving. Even so, this weak assumption seems sufficient for this illustration, as I think most contributors see it as a reason for the list.

then letting unproblematic posts come here instead of going to an
appropriate list actually increases the problem proportion on the
appropriate list.
Letting they come here first doesn't avoid they end on the appropriate

Can you provide some examples of threads here that actually result in a post to an appropriate list? I can think of one that did and one that has yet to appear where it was directed.

Setting the CC works also from debian-women. Also the problem may be
solved here before leaving, so I do not see how this increases problem
proportion in the existing list.

I think you may have misinterpreted "problematic". By that, I meant a message which shows whatever habits subscribers here see as a problem of debian lists. Each post not showing those habits which only appears here is one less unproblematic post to the main lists, thereby raising their problem proportion. I think this might be what some call the "ghetto effect".

Without careful handling, this list makes the other debian lists worse.
So the basis for posting-debian-woman badness is that people here won't be
able of caring enough to avoid such dispersion?

Sorry, I don't understand this.

  A dangerous assumption IMO, I expected better grounded reasons.

I believe they are better grounded than you seem to think. Anyway, how would you feel if I wrote "I expected better grounded objections"? I don't think this style of closing is noble.

MJR/slef    My Opinion Only and not of any group I know

Reply to: