From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1IA296-0003Cv-0p for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 15 Jul 2007 11:20:12 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l6FBIpRf008967; Sun, 15 Jul 2007 11:18:51 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l6FBGmn5006627 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2007 11:16:49 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B887D65090 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2007 11:16:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -1.181 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.181 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-1.182, BAYES_50=0.001] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pEoT0vP-KdeQ for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2007 11:16:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0981B650BE for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2007 11:16:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IA25e-00014h-Ro for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sun, 15 Jul 2007 13:16:38 +0200 Received: from ip68-230-68-110.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.230.68.110]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2007 13:16:38 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-230-68-110.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2007 13:16:38 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: ML changes Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 11:16:32 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <46968E00.4070202@gentoo.org> <1184308886.9892.48.camel@tuxhugs> <1184347521.8347.24.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> <200707131204.08923.bulliver@badcomputer.org> <1184352243.1351.24.camel@wlt.obsidian-studios.com> <20070713195135.39d2dbeb@snowflake> <1184353448.1351.29.camel@wlt.obsidian-studios.com> <4698A357.4070503@burnieanglican.org.au> <1184433928.6676.18.camel@wlt.obsidian-studios.com> <4699D2A2.9010709@burnieanglican.org.au> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-230-68-110.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.131 (Ghosts: First Variation) Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: de29b18b-3866-4201-945d-f5dd016971c3 X-Archives-Hash: 0314f8880b598b4dbebc23f00a937849 Will Briggs posted 4699D2A2.9010709@burnieanglican.org.au, excerpted below, on Sun, 15 Jul 2007 17:54:10 +1000: > At the moment gentoo-dev is a "one big noisy room" forum. This is seen > as a "problem" > > Propose solutions have included: > > 1) The "Let's divide up the room" solution - (and so we have proposals > for gentoo-politics, gentoo-flamewar and other more "specialised" fora) > > [snip 2] > > The first doesn't work because it's well nigh impossible to enforce what > is on or off topic. Not really. Basically, once we have -politics or whatever, if anyone says it's OT for -dev, I don't see the point in arguing it further here, just post there. I've seen it work. With a bit of cooperation, once one respected regular (basically dev, for our purposes) says it goes to the other list/group/room/whatever, none of the regulars reply any further. The point is, once there's the other group/list to point to, it's not worth fighting over any longer, so even if a regular believes it actually /does/ belong in the "home" group/list, because there's another list/group and to maintain the common peace, that's it, it goes to the other list/group. Very very seldom is it actually worth breaking the common peace and fighting over, and when there /is/ discussion, when someone /does/ go beyond the norm, it's generally handled privately, person-to-person, because the cost of breaking rank publicly is chaos, which benefits no one of the regulars, only deliberate trolls. I'd really really like to have a go at it, to see if we /can/ make it work. I think we can, and /if/ we can, it's clearly a superior solution to forced moderation or other "forced" measures. Peer pressure /can/ work! -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list