Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Wordsman, Lee" <LWordsman@PIRNIE.COM>
>
> Cara,
>
> You make your point perfectly and I agree. It seems having two lists
> could stifle some of the dialogue that ultimately does loop back to
> topic (most times). Some of the off topic stuff also helps put some
> personality behind the community, which I don't think is a bad thing.
>
> I receive the digest version and but not in the manner that Per
> describes. I don't get one super post, I get a list of each individual
> post that I can click on if the subject heading interests me. Do others
> receive the digest in a different format?
>
> Lee
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cara Quinn [mailto:CaraQuinn@onemodelplace.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 3 :06 PM
> To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
> Subject: Re: On vs off topic -and- irritating people...
>
> Hi Per, thanks for your reply. Yes, I'm familiar with filtering and
> such, and am subscribed to several email lists that all go to
> appropriate
> inboxes, or multiple lists to one, so I'm completely comfortable with
> doing
> that, but the points I was trying to make, I think might have been
> lost...
>
> Firstly, having all of the LD traffic, (whatever that may be) on one
> 'LD' list, promotes a smooth flow of ideas from extreme to extreme,
> which
> is personally, what keeps me coming back here to this list. Without
> that,
> honestly, the list would hold considerably less interest for me. :)
> -Just
> my own opinion, of course...
>
> Secondly, if a second list is to exist, and be somehow affiliated
> with
> LD , why should the moderation style HERE change? I know we've said that
>
> the status quo is to be preserved here, but as long as 'OT' posts are
> going
> somewhere else, that's not really happening in practice is it?...
> In other words, rather than simply letting this list adapt as it has
> done before, to accommodate people, actual material that would have gone
> to
> THIS list is now, not. So, instead of simple changes to the existing
> flow,
> to adapt it, it's being completely diverted, in an 'all or nothing'
> fashion. Does that make sense?... Furthermore, there is now more
> bandwidth on a regular basis about what is on vs what is off
> topic! lol! Isn't this exactly the sort of thing we were trying to
> avoid?... lol! -And of course, my own posts here, not withstanding!
> :)
>
> Now, having said all of this, as I understood what happened a few
> week s
> ago, people were simply not happy about a book discussion which they
> felt
> interfered with the gear chat... So, a new list was started, where
> things
> like book chats could happen. I.E. LDOT...
>
> What I'm wondering is why the exclusive / heavily moderated gear chat
>
> and more extreme on topic format nature couldn't be applied to THAT list
>
> rather than this one?... Why do the book chats need to leave and the
> gear
> chat stay?... Why can't the book chats stay, and the gear chat stay as
> well?... :) -But, the extreme no-frills 'on topic' gear chat could
> move
> to the new list...
> Meanwhile, here on this list, we could simply continue as is, or was,
> rather, :) and just be more aware and practice better netiquette and
> have
> both book chats AND gear chats?... This doesn't, at the moment, seem to
> be
> what is happening. (even though we say it's supposed to) If I'm
> mistaken,
> then so be it, but I don't think I am...
>
> Lastly, as for my own personal thoughts on subbing to the new list,
> (aside from my mention above, of the notion of too much
> compartmentalization of the flow of ideas, causing interference in
> effect)
> just in a general access sense, different lists cause my email client
> and
> screen reader to ;display header info differently, so in effect,
> different
> lists are easier and less time consuming for me to read. This is one of
>
> the easy ones, whereas Google (while definitely not being the most
> difficult) is not... So for me, joining a chat list in that format
> would
> only be a nuisance. And, as I'd mentioned above, even if I did, the
> flow
> that has happened HERE, because of both extremes being present, still
> would n't exist. It's like separating a cake out into it's ingredients,
> and
> serving them. :) Sure, you'd still get what's in the cake, BUT IT'S
> NOT A
> CAKE!!! :) lol!
>
> Am I making sense now?...
>
> So, what I'm saying is that I think fragmenting like this is changing
>
> the primary nature of the list. If that's what people want, then fine,
> that's cool! :) It's just not MY personal preference... :)
>
> -And, as long as there is some sort of venue which is sort of, but
> not
> quite, affiliated with LD, where the book posts go, :) rather than
> going
> here, this list is a different place... Does that make sense?...
>
>
> Anyway, I hope I've clarified my points. Have a terrific day!...
>
> Smiles,
>
> Cara :)
>
> At 09:16 AM 10/11/2007 +0200, you wrote:
>
> >Just a reminder of what initially kicked off this discussion, since
> >no one have so far mentioned that in this new thread. It was about
> >making life a little easier for those who struggle with a digest
> >version of the list. In the digest version many letters are baked
> >into one super letter, which means the user can not use normal e-mail
> >filtering. Especially problematic for digest reading is when someone
> >quotes way too much and out of context.
> >
> >But people, please don't stop quoting now! Intelligent quoting makes
> >reading a lot easier and is generally regarded as good mailing list
> >manners. When replying, you should keep just as much of the old text
> >needed for a new reader to get the background to your own reply. Drag
> >with mouse button held down to mark text that you want to quote, hit
> >Reply, type something and finally hit Send.
> > < BR>> >Thank you, Travis, for posting the list rules to the list. It just
> >dawned on me that I have never seen those on the list and that's bad.
> >Most lists have an automatic function that posts the general list
> >rules once a month to the list, just as a reminder.
> >
> >The "mysterious LDOT list" is not associated with this list in any
> >way other than that it was crated as a private initiative by a member
> >of this list and that some more members of this list is subscribing
> >to it. I personally use it to post things like guitar amp reviews,
> >funny stories or whatever not looping oriented. As for Cara's wish of
> >having it all on this list I would like to suggest a way to make that
> >happen in your own praxis; simply subscribe to the other list and set
> >you mail application to dump those mails into the same box as the LD
> >list. Yo u don't even have to know to which list a single message
> >belongs - hit reply and it goes back through the same "list channel"
> >where it came in.
> >
> >Greetings from Sweden
> >
> >Per Boysen
> >www.boysen.se (Swedish)
> >www.looproom.com (international)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >No virus found in this incoming message.
> >Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database:
> >269.14.6/1060 - Release Date: 10/9/2007 4:43 PM
>
> ---
> View my on-line portfolio at:
>
> http://www.onemodelplace.com/CaraQuinn
>
> "The only things I really think are important, are love, and each
> other. -Then, anything is possible..."
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~cara-quinn
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.14.6/1060 - Release Date:
> 10/9/2007 4:43 PM
>