Re: [offtopic] Topicality debate [my 2 bits]

[Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org>]

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006, John Underhill wrote:
> -Moderated Approach
> Create an nanogofftopic@ to give a vent to members. If a post is clearly 
> offtopic and not announced as such, use a 'three strikes your out' approach, 
> first warning and inviting review of list guidelines, then as a last measure 
> cancelling list subscription. Include 'this is offtopic!' responders among 
> offences, and maybe we can reduce some of the list noise.

Hi John, thanks for the wise words.

I believe our biggest problem is that "on topic" is not defined. Many here
see different issues as operational to them while a few here always yell
and scream the minute someone posts that interest.

An off-topic list won't help much, if we can't decide, by poll or
arbitrary choice, what actually is on-topic. That can later on be
followed.

Lists evolve, readerships change, and subjects of interest change. But
without certain guidelines, I don't see why any crowd should be silenced
or any minority with loud voices should silence them.

If such a concensus/decision is reached, it will be followed to the letter
with the full backing of whoever needs to back itup.

Thanks, 

        Gadi.

> John