Re: OT: A Plea (was OT everything)

 --- Peter Clark skrzypszy:

> > People, people!!! This morning when I logged on around 11AM, I got 92 msgs.
> > This evening, at 6:30, there were 150+ (of all these, only perhaps 10 were
> > spam or other correspondents).  These are 1-day records, and while I enjoy
> > reading each and every msg., it does strike me it's time to calm down, and
> > revert to...oh, say, conlanging???
>
>         Amen and amen!
Motion seconded. Yesterday, I logged off at 4:45 with no unread messages in my
Conlang box. This morning at 8:00 there were >191< new messages from Conlang
only! This is too much! I have two places were I can check my mail and send
messages: at work I have a good machine with a fast connection, but basically I
am supposed to work there; and at home I have a slow modem. One of the things
that trouble me is that my time is limited (job, family, my own conlangs, other
interests). I really enjoy participating in the discussions here, but the truth
is that I am getting more and more frustrated, because all the time I can spare
for the list goes to selecting the messages that are worth reading; I can't
even afford to read them carefully, let alone to respond the way I would like
to.
What is even more frustrating that most of the few really conlang-related
messages receive little or no attention.

>         I would like to take this opportunity to petition He of the Strange
> Powers (who Stone--perhaps out of the mistaken belief that this refers to the
> Deity--unkindly labeled a "she") to restore the 100-message limit. I would be
> content with even a 75-message limit. That strikes me as reasonable, since I
> believe the average is about 50. Once we start going over 50, it's a sure
> sign that there is a lot of off-topic traffic.
Agreed. But AFAIK the 100-message limit is still there. Apparently, that is not
the solution.
One question regarding the limit: after the list has been released, do the
messages that were sent after it was blocked count as messages for the new day?

Instead of lowering the daily limit, I would rather think everybody should take
his own responsability (which, after all, IS possible in such a small group).
Please people, don't send messages unless you really have something to say;
don't send more than ten messages a day, and if the off-topic rate of your
messages is over 50%, then at least consider the possibility of not responding
to something.

> > Note that it is possible to go to the Web site and block traffic
> > that is flagged OT or CHAT.
>
>         Yes, that would be nice, IF PEOPLE BOTHERED TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT OF
> THE MESSAGE! It's nice that (most) of the current OT threads are so marked,
> but we have not been so lucky in the past, and I expect this abuse of
> netiquette to continue well into the future.
I agree. Sometimes five threads about completely different subjects go under
the same header. Ppl., make sure that the subject of the message covers its
load, and that it is flagged appropriately (when off-topic). Usually I try to
do that, although sometimes I forget.
BTW, I have nothing against off-topic threads. Some of them interest me too
much for using OT/CHAT filters. It is rather the on/off-topic ratio that
worries me.

Jan

=====
"Originality is the art of concealing your source." - Franklin P. Jones

__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience
http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/yplus/yoffer.html