[plug] List domains and netiquette

[Christian]

Leon Brooks wrote:
> There has been considerable off-list discussion of my previous comment,
> and one proposal which was floated was to add another list to spark,
> called something like "serious" or "technical", which would give people
> who are irritated by total-newbie questions a forum to inhabit.
> The idea behind the list is that it is reasonably low-traffic, and
> either invitation only or read-only except for invitees. Questions that
> would whizz comfortably over the head of the average newbie could expect
> to return non-speculative answers and flamewars would cost you your
> invitation. I prefer the public-read-only idea, as a newbie could then
> monitor the technical list and ask consequent questions on the main
> list.

I quite like this idea in a lot of ways... however, there are a number
of possible problems.  For example, a lot of people would probably want
to be on both lists so the "low-traffic" list would just be adding to
the current traffic (most of which I don't really mind).  The other
thing is that, in my experience, low traffic lists often tend to die
since people eventually lose interest in something that's frequently
inactive.  Finally, I've found that... well, sometimes (actually, quite
often) when I have a technical question that I post to the list I don't
really get an answer.  Sometimes there are answers but these often don't
really help (well-intended though they are).  In the end, the PLUG list
is more, for me, a place to help newbies and enjoy a very basic,
non-hard-core set of discussions --- it's more entertainment than it is
education.  Let's face it, the PLUG list doesn't break too many
technical boundaries.  Therefore, it may be worth asking: would this
"serious" list really have a lot of benefit?

Another thing is, this technical list would require quasi-moderation,
i.e., not moderation of each message but moderation of the current
status of the behaviour of the subscribers.  Of course there are plenty
of obvious cases but in the others, who decides when someone created a
problem and when they're just getting passionate?

> The con of this is that some experts would eventually drop the main PLUG
> list. The pro is that there would a be a list in which some who would
> otherwise drift away from PLUG anyway would be interested enough to
> participate.

I think someone who drifts away from PLUG because they feel it lacks
technical, will probably still drift away from the technical list.  As I
said, I find that most of my technical question don't really get
answered on PLUG so I normally just take them to the appropriate
topic-specific list where there is a much higher chance of finding
someone who has encountered the same problem or who knows enough about
the internals to deduce it.  Therefore, it wouldn't surprise me if
people who don't find PLUG technical enough would still drift away.

> Another idea which has been floated is the idea of a local FAQ; for
> example, questions peculiar to this list or the iinet hegemony could be
> answered there, and a distinctive link provided to it both on the
> join-the-list page of the website and in a one-line message footer:
> 
>     *** Want to unsubscribe? Other questions? See
> http://faq.plug.linux.org.au/ ***

I think an FAQ is definitely in order (and, as I said before, I'm quite
happy to maintain it...) but I don't like the message footers.

I guess in the end my opinion would be that an FAQ be introduced, plus a
set of guidelines on what should be posted to the list (e.g.,,
emphasising the "attack the idea, not the [wo]man" principle which might
have prevented the most recent incident).  If people like the idea of
two separate lists operating the way Leon describes then there would
probably be some benefits here too.

Regards,

Christian.