[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Re: merger and mailing lists

On Wed, 7 May 1997 00kmyoung@bsuvc.bsu.edu wrote:

> for any new system.  A new e-mail listserve should have 2 or 3 separate
> lists, one for CEDA/NDT administrative information, tournament info, and
> topic info that is necessary for everyone.  Then, have a second list that
> people can discuss/flame/attack/badger each other over theory and other

This has been suggested six or seven different times in this thread, in
slightly different forms (some suggest two lists, some three, and with
different delineation criteria).  I've been hanging out on the 'net for
quite awhile now, and have seen variations of this tried on listservs and
in newsgroups.  I cannot point to any case where it has worked as
intended.  Messages will generally fall into three groups (descriptions
from the point of view of the person posting the message):

1) This belongs on the "announcement" list, but there might be folks on
the "discussion" list who don't subscribe to "announcements," and I want
everyone to see it.  I'll send it to both. 

2) This belongs on the "announcement" list, but nobody reads only that, so
I'll only send it to the "discussion" list. 

3) This might fit on either list, so I'll send it to both.

Note that in cases (1) and (3), in the absence of a duplication filter,
everyone subscribed to both lists gets both copies of the message.  This
cancels out the advantage of merging the lists.  In case (2), the stated
purpose of the "announcement" list is completely bypassed.  There is a
fourth possibility, seldom employed, where messages that might be of
interest to both lists will only be sent to one ("this is ambiguous, so
I'll just pick one list and send it").  In general, where such divisions
are made, one list ends up withering and getting cancelled, because the
people who have subscribed to it figure out that they're missing a lot of
stuff they wanted to catch.

Sorry this is such a long posting on what seems like such a trivial issue,
but others have raised similar objections and nobody seems to hear them. 
Maybe by laying the argument out in detail, the point will get across.  If
you want to merge the lists, merge the lists.  If you want fragmentation
and duplication, create as many lists as possible.  I suggest a theory
list, an announcement list, a "smoke-filled room" list (CEDA elites only),
a sports discussion list, a flame list, and a "I'm looking for so-and-so
but I'm too damned lazy to type 'review CEDA-L'" list. 

          --Alan

__________________
Alan Dove
N3IMU
ad52@columbia.edu
http://128.59.173.136/Poliolab/Alan/Dove.html
Follow-Ups: References:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page