[plug] PLUG mailing list regular post (sample proposal)

[Bret Busby]

Leon Brooks wrote:
> 
> Please comment on this proposal for a regular (monthly?) PLUG mailing
> list hints posting.
> 
> --------8<----cut-here----8<--------
> 
> This is the regular automated PLUG mailing list announcement. For more
> information about PLUG, visit the website at http://plug.linux.org.au/
> 
> The PLUG mailing list is mailing list with an essentially public
> participation and audience. For this reason, we ask that you keep
> postings polite, clean and acrimony-free.
> 
> PLUG is a fairly casual group, and beyond basic public manners, we ask
> that you refrain from insisting that others accept your views and
> values. Feel free to criticise any posting to this list, but do so
> kindly and politely.
> 
> To maintain the public spirit of this list, we would be pleased if you
> refrained from publishing business advertisements here, except for ONE
> advertisement of Linux-related events, such as job offers, Linux courses
> and symposia.
> 
> If you wish to sell us printer toner, the latest nose-hair removing tool
> or sneak previews of pornographic websites, we ask that instead of
> posting to this list you attend one of the regular meetings and put your
> proposal to us in person. Any posting of printer toner advertisements
> and the like to this list is done at the poster's own risk and very much
> against our advice.
> 
> If you crave more immediate feedback, and perhaps less politeness, you
> could try visiting the #linuxaus channel with your favourite IRC client.
> 
> Most members on this list prefer to receive plain text mail (not HTML
> and never MS-Word documents) and some members do not have facilities for
> displaying graphics.
> 
> Quoting of large messages to put in a one-line reply is strongly
> discouraged, as is posting of large attachments (post a Web reference to
> the file instead, so only those interested need spend the time and
> bandwidth fetching it).
> 
> Mailing list and Web services are provided for free by a Western
> Australian ISP. Please treat this gift graciously.
> 
> If you have a complaint about the list, a posting on it, or the
> behaviour of a particular poster, please address it to the list list
> manager at plug-owner at plug.linux.org.au [Matt please correct if wrong],
> NOT the main list.
> 
> --------8<----cut-here----8<--------
> 
> Whaddaya think?
> 

A bit long-winded, isn't it?

Surely it could be summed up in about two or three paragraphs?

It seems to miss some significant components; eg, postings to the list; and
message content, should be relevant to Linux; or to PLUG, or to possible impact
on the mailing list (such as pending government censorship, or possible
government hacking of the server?); thus should comments about the sexual
tendencies, or personal relationships of people, not be posted; and, unless The
Big Bodgy Software Software Company does something relevant to Linux (and this
excludes putting out even more bodgy software, or becoming even more sinister),
perhaps bandwidth usage and server space could be reduced, by not illuminating
us to the further to the wonky goings-on of that company?

Perhaps the following?

-----------------------------
This is your monthly reminder of what this list is about, and the expectations
relating to messages posted to the mailing list. (This message could also be
incorporated in the initial email message to new subscribers to the mailing
list, Matt?)

We ask that you read and comply with the following, to keep the mailing list
operating smoothly.

PLUG is a non-profit organisation, with the purposes of promoting the use of
Linux, and increasing knowledge about Linux and its applications. The mailing
list is similarly oriented.

We therefore ask that anyone posting messages to the list, ask the following
questions, before posting any message, and, if the answers to all the questions
are "Yes", then, by all means, post the message.
1. Is the content of the message Linux-related?
2. If the message is, or contains a query relating to Linux, have you first
checked the messages archive on the PLUG web site, for at least a month of
messages before posting the query message, and found that the information that
you seek, is not there?
2. If the message is, or contains a query relating to PLUG, have you first
checked the web site information about PLUG, and found that the information is
not on the web site?
3. Is the message in plain text format?
4. Is the message polite and respectful of other subscribers of the mailing
list, and free of any personal comments about them, beyond seeking clarification
of their Linux knowledge, in a way that is not derogatory?
5. If the message contains information about an aspect of Linux, or, an answer
to a query, does the message include the source of the information, whether it
is from a particular experience, or from opinions of others, etc?
6. Is the message free of any complaint about the conduct of the mailing list,
or of a named person on the mailing list, that could otherwise be directed to
either the person whose conduct is a problem, in the first instance, if it is a
particular person's conduct that is the problem, or to
"plug-owner at plug.linux.org.au [Matt please correct if wrong]"? (from Leon's
suggested notice) (This proviso should perhaps exclude responses to any requests
from the Committee, for public discussion of how subscribers want the list
conducted?)
7. Is the message free from business advertisements, except for the first
posting of an
 advertisement of Linux-related events, such as job offers, Linux courses and
symposia? (Based on Leon's suggested notice)
8. Is body of the message, if a reply to a previous posting, free of any text to
which the message does not reply?
9. If the message is a reply to a message on the mailing list, is the message
appropriately sent to the mailing list, rather than to the poster of the message
to which your message is a reply?
10. Is the signature of the message, less than 10 lines long?
11. If the message is a response to a message posted on the mailing list, does
the message avoid the person to whose message you are replying, from receiving
duplicate copies of the message, by ensuring that the message responds to either
the person (if appropriate), or to the mailing list, but not to both?
12. Does the message avoid the use of receipt notification? (Even the old like
me can learn)
13. If the information in the message differs from, or conflicts with,
information contained in a previous posted message, does the message qualify the
difference, and respect and tolerate the difference of the previous message
posted?

_____________________________

Maybe others will regard that as too long winded; but, I think that it covers
all the significant points, in as few words as may make it understandable?

-- 

Bret Busby

........................................