ifis-list split

To those who joined this list overnight... welcome...

Now to EVERYONE... THIS INCLUDES >>>YOU<<< !!!

It's sad but true... Last year, the ifis mailing-list was moderated, by
me. This meant that whenever anyone wanted to mail ifis@, the
message first went to me, so I could check it, then assuming it was
sensible, I sent it out to all the members of the list.

Towards the end of the year I decided that the moderation was
pointless... The only time I ever needed to forbid postings was when
someone had accidentally replied to the LIST when they meant to reply to
the original poster, so at the start of this year I decided to remove
the moderation completely, let ANYONE post to the list, but make it so
replies wen to the original poster.

I'm now almost regretting this idea. Even though there's usually less
than 5 ifis posts a day, I've had several people complaining that it's
too busy. :-) A solution has been proposed... That the ifis-list should
be split into an ifis-chat and an ifis-announce, and that perhaps the
announce one might be moderated again.

Advantages of the split:
* people can subscribe to only the announce list if they aren't
interested in chat, and theoretically vice-versa.
* less mail for those people who only check mail once a week (once
a WEEK? I check mail SEVERAL TIMES AN HOUR during the day!)
Disadvantages of the split:
* more confusion over where a mail should be sent?
* more complicated subscription options
Advantages of being moderated:
* someone (probably me) can check that no chat ends up on the
announce list
* keeps the "I get too much mail" people happy.
Disadvantages of being moderated:
* Someone has to be the moderator. This is likely to be me.
* longer delay for urgent announcements - If someone has an urgent
announcement, and the moderator (me?) isn't around at the time,
the message will NOT get sent straight out until it has been
approved, whenever the moderator gets around to it. I can only
moderate the list during working hours on weekdays, and if I'm
too busy working I might take a few hours even then.
* You have to accept the moderator's opinions about what IS and
ISN'T a valid post.
* a few administrative problems setting up the moderation process
again.

There are a few options... I'll take a vote on these...

OPTION A: We leave the list how it is now, and hope that people will
quieten down a bit soon

OPTION B: We keep one list, but I start moderating it again.

OPTION C: We split into 2 lists, neither of them moderated, and we
assume that our members are sensible enough to post to the right
lists.

OPTION D: We split into 2 lists, and moderate the ifis-announce one to
make sure that ONLY announcements are sent there, and everything
else gets sent to the chat one. The chat list is probably best
left unmoderated, then we let anyone post any junk there.

OPTION E: none of the above. If you have a better idea, please let me
know.

PLEASE reply to this mail (you SHOULD reply to nick@, NOT
ifis@) with a simple 1-line message saying something like "I
VOTE FOR IFIS-LIST OPTION Z". IF you vote for option E, please add your
own bright ideas.

IF you know anyone who is not on the mailing-list yet (EG because they
don't like the volume of mail), please get them to vote too.

I'd really like it if EVERYBODY voted - press your "reply" key/button
NOW!


Nick Waterman, Network Manager, Cimio Ltd. nick@
http://www.noseynick.org/ Team AMIGA! #include <stddisclaimer.h>
Your computer is dead, and it was so alive.
You shouldn't have installed... Win'95.

nick wrote
Yeah, its busy. Its busy because we have (generally) been talking about
important issues for the society ie the library. Despite our Chairman
shouting at us to stop asking after this, I feel that this is a question
which is (should be!) fundamental to the society. It is something which has
been a problem for many years. Keeping the books at our place appeared to be
one comparitively stable solution, but obviously one requiring some effort
if books were going to be taken in to college. This, of course would have
necessitated something being done about insurance. Meanwhile, some books
could be rotated through the (too small) cupboard provided for them in the
Union. I wonder what would happen to the rest of the books? Jackie posted on
this, but I gather was not at the pub yesterday, as being a finalist is
beginning to impinge on her time! This was a shame, as I was hoping to see
what could be done about this quickly, because the books have not been
available for far too long.
^^^^

So: are people really saying that this sort of discussion is inappropriate
to this list? Is the above discussion "chat" I cannot really see how they
can be members of IFIS and _not_ want to know about such things. I have
spent literally years questioning past chairmen about what has happened to
the library, or when are we going to spend the theoric and social on new
books? With access to this list, it seems possible to get some feedback to
the committee rather faster and more effectively. Alternatively, is the
problem with the few more frivolous postings?

Of the options, Nick wrote
So, that really does sound like the only purpose of the announcement list is
"IFIS dinner at X restaurant.
Menu
...
for $20,
please hand in deposit by Thursday 9th Nov"

Is that what you mean? Reduced to just that, it would leave out essential
issues. What goes into which list? If we are to split it is presumably to
help those who are having trouble with band-width. I cannot see how to do
that without isolating them from essential discussions. Would it be possible
to send out a bundled-up set of messages on important issues for those
people? Thus once a week they receive one long message containing all
postings on "Discussions about the library", say. I guess that's E, then!



Jenny Gould

---
jenny@

"Share and Enjoy"
-Marketing Division, Sirius Cybernetics Corporation

(The above opinions do not represent a policy statement for or on behalf of
One Chip Solutions)

On Fri, 25 Oct 1996, Jenny Gould wrote:
<snipped>
We haven't just been talking about the library, you know. Cunning of you
to slip it in though...
No, they're saying that talk about videos, and caustic comments to
various members of the committee (mentioning no names), oh, and the
helpfully subjected 'general chat' series of emails are not of interest
to most recipients. This seems fair enough.

<snipped>
You seem to be missing the point. There are essential discussions, yes,
like the library. There will be postings about video evenings and such
like, and other things essential to the society. However, emails about
'whether independence day was predictable' can be safely considered as
non-essential.

'Bundled up messages?' If you're talking about a digest, then I can say,
as the recipient of one, that they're very annoying. It's difficult to
reply to a single posting, and you have little idea about the content
until you've read it all. Besides which, do you really want to put poor
Nick to all that trouble? He is doing this out of the goodness of his
heart, and he does have a job to do as well. Personally, I'm happy with
the list as it is now, but if that many people are unhappy, the split
seems the best way to go.

Ben Dunkley, Publicity officer.

jenny wrote, in discussing what would be in which list, if it was split into
"chat" and announcements"
ben wrote
No, quite deliberate, as this is an example of something which is _not_ an
"announcement", but I would regard as more than just chat. I want to know
which of the following 50 posts I have on my newsreader people regard as
"just chat", which "announcements", and which are generally "important
discussions"

I personally think _some_ of the posts are irrelevant, but where do you draw
the line?

Roughly, the topics have been:

4 posts pn split lists
2 on video evenings
1 on star trek humour
1 on hogfiller ?
4+ 4 +1 library/ IFIS(Library)
2+1 +1+2+3 X files
3 meeting with union
1 friends tapes
1+1 +3 +2chat
4 +3 library/dinner
2 whats on / ents
1 quantum leap
1 star trek
1 bab 6
1 welcome

so, of these 50 posts 19 are relevant to the library (20 if you say my one
on the split list mentions the library discussion)

Nick wrote
jenny wrote
ben wrote
Well, I'm sorry people may have felt that way: personally I feel I have
_tried_ to keep comment to helpful suggestions. I have tried _not_ to
discuss personality issues: I know that trying to get anything out of the Union is
not necessarily easy and can easily make someone stressed. However, us tough
old-timers are a resource you could use, if you choose to.
No, I am _not_ missing the point. I am making the point that the suggested
split was "announcements" and "chat". Not "announcements/discussions" and
"non-essential chat". Where _would_ you draw the line. That to me sounds
hard....
Well, I was just thinking of saving all "chat" messages on a particularly
important thread to a file, and reposting to the "announce" as one file. It
would mean people would need to be careful as to topic postings following
on. Its very much not an ideal solution, but I wondered what people would
think as a method to get round the bandwidth problem.


Jenny Gould

---
jenny@

"Share and Enjoy"
-Marketing Division, Sirius Cybernetics Corporation

(The above opinions do not represent a policy statement for or on behalf of
One Chip Solutions)

On Fri, 25 Oct 1996, Jenny Gould wrote:
Now you know as well as I, that all cunning things are done deliberately.
I would have thought it obvious that 'important discussions' would be
included with announcements.
Can you really not add 4, 4 and 1?
My point. We haven't just been talking about the library.
I'm not saying you are posting irrelevent mails. That was my point.
How about 'Things that affect all members of IFIS' and 'things of
interest to some members of IFIS'? Now THAT shouldn't be hard.
That would involve much more work that a split into announce and chat.

Look, I'm not trying to insult you, except when it's easy ('cause I'm
like that) I just don't think your idea is sound. Let's see what other
people vote shall we?

Ben

When all this started the original intention was to create a list that
was basically notices of forth coming events and not talk about
anything, while the original list was to keep going as it is.

The reason was that some people didn't want to keep getting mail on the
same subjects that were then discussed down the pub on Thursday as the
same arguements keeping go round with the odd new one added in. It is
not that they are not interested but they are demanding the much
forgotten right "not to have to listen".

These are people who haven't worked out how to delete mail messages?

Doesn't take long to skim through, and delete all the waffle.

Announcements tend to arrive with obvious subject lines anyway.
We could semi-formalise it, and ask that all announcements come labeled
Subject: ANNOUNCEMENT: Free beer at the Bob house
or something like that...

Dominic.

"A friend is someone who will help you move.
A real friend is someone who will help you move a body." [Unknown]

On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Dominic Thomas wrote:
we should also say that non-annoucements should come labeled
_ Subject: WAFFLE: dont read me - delete me


Lee Maguire : lee@
"If only we'd listened to that boy, instead of walling him up in the
abandoned coke oven." -- Monty Burns, 9F15

Nick started this all with saying
In Nick's post he talks about the people who find the list too busy. It is
surely their opinions which count as to _how_ to split it. Are they

1)people who want to use and receive an "announce only" list, and leave
others to use another list for all discussion.

2) people who want to use and receive an "announce and important discussion"
list and leave others to use a "chit-chat" list.

leaving.. 3) People who want to use and receive everything (or are at least
unconcerned about it).

4) Huh? Anyone else?


Going on, Jenny said..
Ben said
Jenny said
Ben said
Andrew (the Treasurer) said
That was what Nick proposed, yes. Ben (publicity officer) thus seems to be
suggesting a different split from what Nick originally asked for votes on.
My problem is if people are going to "vote" to split, we better ensure they
vote as to how to split! Are they in Group 1, 2 or 3 (or 4 for those I have
overlooked... ) Nick may end up moderating the restricted list, so he needs
to know how people want it split!)

Andrew said
Was that the problem? I assumed the problem was with bandwidth (and phone
bills). I _am_ very interested in some of the discussion, which I may well
miss as I can only get to the pub at 10.30ish. Some I regard as irrelevant.
However, we have a fixed link, and therefore I don't mind the chit-chat.
However I would have thought that there would be some who also care about
some of the discussions, but are finding idle chit-chat annoying as it is
running up their phone bill. I would imagine they are people who cannot make
Thursdays at all!

It would seem an awful shame if we cut them off from discussions they do
want to hear, because of too much "irrelevant chit-chat"

Dominick wrote
If people followed on subject threads more rigorously, and thought them out
hard first, it might help!

daniel wrote
Hear hear!! As I said, I only manage to arrive at about 10.30 plus, and
therefore may well miss things. Our Chairman was not there last week, and
won't be there next week: Isn't she entitled to be informed?

daniel continued
Philip wrote
which is why the list system is so valuable!!
And not keep changing them a little? For example,

List Split ? -> Mail list ifis-list split -> mail list.

That's why I went 1+8+1+1 for my summary; yes I could add them up, but I was
trying to indicate that I was combining the totals for slightly different
subject headings :-).


Sorry that's all so long....

Jenny Gould

---
jenny@

"Share and Enjoy"
-Marketing Division, Sirius Cybernetics Corporation

(The above opinions do not represent a policy statement for or on behalf of
One Chip Solutions)

Well, one E-mail takes very little resource to receive, and it seems some
people cannot follow a discussion without lots of help:
Ben wrote
Oh dear, well if Ben really _does_ insist on being rude and stupid, I will
try and explain again- but I feel anyone who can read will see the important
points. It was long, because it seemed necessary to carefully go through and
explain things to you (and no, the intention was _not_ in order to
demonstrate why I "couldn't" add numbers. Of course I can add- can you?

There is a lot of difference between:
1)splitting the list into "announce only" and "discussion"
2) splitting the list into "important discussions and announcements" and
"chit-chat"

By quoting the different opinions of Ben and Andrew (both committee
members), I was showing that the question as posed by Nick did not clearly
distinguish between the two. If people are to choose, it seems only fair
that they know what they are choosing between.

Ben also wrote
It seemed to me that Ben actually understood my point.( My mistake: perhaps
you do understand now? ) So it is irrelevant that we split the list
_without_ deciding _how_ to split it.
Yes, but what are they voting _for_?
Jenny Gould

---
jenny@

"Share and Enjoy"
-Marketing Division, Sirius Cybernetics Corporation

(The above opinions do not represent a policy statement for or on behalf of
One Chip Solutions)

May I ask how the vote is going on:

Nick's Options:
and Jenny's comments on voting: ie would a split be:
I have not been posting, because people seemed so unhappy about the number
of posts issued, but today my mail-box has been filled on critiques of "how
much to include from previous posts". It's hardly a vital issue for IFIS.

Of course, if you don't quote relevant bits, you then receive choruses of
complaints from people who read and delete, who cannot follow the thread of
the conversation. Also, when some people cannot follow an argument,
providing them with lots of help seems a good idea, as they do not seem to
be able to relate things together themselves.

Meanwhile, if we are being asked to keep down the chit-chat on the original
list, can we at least have the second list up, and then later we can
fine-tune a bit more about what goes where. How about everyone gets both to
start off with, and we keep only really important points to the first list,
guys.

Jenny Gould

---
jenny@

"Share and Enjoy"
-Marketing Division, Sirius Cybernetics Corporation

(The above opinions do not represent a policy statement for or on behalf of
One Chip Solutions)

well if this gets through, good and bad

Jenny Gould

---
jenny@

"Share and Enjoy"
-Marketing Division, Sirius Cybernetics Corporation

(The above opinions do not represent a policy statement for or on behalf of
One Chip Solutions)