I think it's a bit tricky to impose such a specific limit. I think one post a day is quite low for what is supposed to be a venue for discussion - we simply don't have enough people here for that.
However, I think it would be quite reasonable to ask people to try to moderate themselves. If you are frustrated because the mails are filling up your inbox, then this is not exactly the solution. Foundation-l is a relatively high traffic list, even without Anthony and Thomas Dalton there will be enough e-mails on some days that it will overwhelm the inboxes of many people who do not use threaded e-mail software. Although I agree that there is a definite occurance of over-posting, I do not think we should slow discussion so much just because it can be inconvenient for people who have not or do not wish to switch to e-mail systems that are more suitable for high traffic mailinglists.
Mark
skype: node.ue
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:27 AM, Anders Wennersten[email protected] wrote:
One idea could be to introduce a rule that each user should limit his/her entries to maximum one/day and thread
I am sure this would lead to better quality, without stopping valuable input, and make the list much more comprehensive and useful. (With this rule last days 80 entires would probalbly been limited to something like 20)
foundation-l is a resource that could be made to be of much use and importance if just the chattiness was limited Anders
Mark Williamson skrev:
Exactly. If you write too many messages, you run the risk that the majority will start to habitually skip over (most of) your messages.
Think of it this way (this is a very simplistic model I think, I'm not an economist): when the central bank of a country prints too much currency, this can cause the value of the currency to go down.
Similarly, if there is a famous painter who only made 5 paintings, they will probably fetch a higher price than if s/he had made 500. It's fine if you always have something to say but I think we have all (the more prolific posters here) been guilty of posting two or three (or more) replies to the same thread at once without waiting for others when we could have consolidated into a single e-mail.
Also, in my opinion (and yours may be different), although I do have an opinion on nearly every thread on this list, it is not always necessary for everybody to know what I think; this is after all a platform for discussion, not for people to come and find out how I feel about things.
Mark
skype: node.ue
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 11:24 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen[email protected] wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
2009/8/28 Anders Wennersten [email protected]:
I have only been on this list for a month, but I am confused over what I read. There are over 700 subscribers, but two, Anthony and Thoams Dalton is allowed, to generate more then a third of all entries and often just these two are driving a whole thread discussion. On Wikipedia we all work hard to work for consensus (all voices are welcome) and stop people dominating a subject. Why is it allowed for two persons to take over a list like it is done here?
We haven't taken anything over. There is nothing stopping anyone else from contributing to the discussion as well.
Other than good sense. (Contributing endless reams of text, that is.)
Yours,
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l