META: A plea

Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:

> I think it would be nice if we had fewer off-topic postings on the list.
This is something that I've been worrying about.  I know that I, for example,
well, talk about a lot of things that aren't ontopic, and have been increasingly
trying to do this kind of thing off-list.   The problem is knowing exactly what
constitutes postable material, and what doesn't, and when something becomes
inappropriate.   If I say something off-hand, not intending for it to become a
huge issue, and then several other people express an interest through posting,
what's to say that it is a bad thing?  There is a spirit to the laws, and as long
as people adhere to that spirit, I see nothing wrong with posts that are technically
off-post, as long as we are all trying, and generally succeeding, in respecting
others' wishes and interests.

> If you ask me, the CHAT: label in a subject line is a sorry excuse for
> an off-topic posting.  Better do not post it.
I think I have to agree with Taliesin here:  the CHAT label serves a
useful function as long as people are responsible and judicious in its
use.  I have, for my part, been trying to be more careful to note the
kind of material that goes in in the post in the the heading so as to
avoid this problem.  Is David Durand around?  Perhaps he could
remind us all what the labeling system is like, so that all of us, including
many newcomers who've never been told about it, could make better
use of it.

> We could do away with the
> CHAT: postings and several other and thereby reduce traffic a lot.
We could, that's true.  But Conlang is more than an intellectual forum
for a good number of us are here. We simply enjoy being around each
other: we are friends.  That is one reason I value this list, because everyone
is so civil, and respectful of each other*, and generally doesn't put ideology
about language or politics or religious belief over valuing others as
interlocutors and as people.

*(Perhaps I should take this opportunity to apologize for times when
I have been less than careful about respecting others' feelings and
beliefs.  There have been more than a few times like this, and so I
apologize for them all here.)

> I HATE wading through about 100 posts by day tossing half of them because
> they are not interesting in any way and in fact do not belong on the
> list.
I understand that feeling.  There are times when I have no interest in the
primary topic of discussion at the time.  So, I ignore them.  If it helps
any, I will try to post more ontopic in the future.

======================================
Tom Wier   |     "Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero."
======================================