Pistos Christou wrote:
That may be the case, but I think "document + moderators" at the
ruby-forum.com -> ruby-talk gateway would help quite a bit. Essentially
it would "filter" at the entrypoint, preventing "bad" things from
getting through. ruby-talk itself and comp.lang.ruby would of course
continue without explicit moderation.
Pistos
Shall we first wait for a couple of weeks to see what the effect of the
things changed by Andreas are (links to documentation and no
unregistered users).
I see the links don't include a link to something describing mailinglist
etiquette, so that might be nice to add.
Edwin
···
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
That impression is probably at the root of your errors here. ruby-talk
is a mailing list. It is *not* a webboard. ruby-forum.com is a
*gateway* to the mailing list.
Ruby doesn't insist. Ruby-forum.com is a service -- of dubious value,
much of the time -- provided by a member of the community who
developed the software behind it.
ruby-talk has also historically been associated with comp.lang.ruby,
but our gateway host for that disappeared due to ... issues. (Not spam
or anything, but changing providers and a reneging on a promise by the
new provider. However, yet another new provider seems to be in the
works.)
Your wildly erroneous assumptions are one of the reasons that I
*loathe* the current state of the ruby-forum.com integration. This is
*despite* the following message at the top of a new post or reply.
Please read before posting
This forum is connected to a mailing list that is read by thousands of people.
Before you post, please use the FAQ, the Ruby documentation and Google to
find an answer to your question. If you can't find an answer there,
make sure to
include all relevant information that is necessary to help you in your post.
If you want to see this mailing list as it *actually* is, I suggest
subscribing to it by visiting the Ruby home page
(http://www.ruby-lang.org/\).
-austin
···
On 6/15/06, Reggie Mr <buppcpp@yahoo.com> wrote:
Austin Ziegler wrote:
> We don't push people away who have at least shown that they're willing
> to look or at least remember that they're posting to a mailing list
> with *thousands* of recipients.
Why does Ruby insist on using a Webboard instead of a regular newsgroup
forum?
--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com * http://www.halostatue.ca/
* austin@halostatue.ca * You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike. // halo • statue
* austin@zieglers.ca
Austin Ziegler wrote:
Why does Ruby insist on using a Webboard instead of a regular newsgroup
forum?
That impression is probably at the root of your errors here. ruby-talk
is a mailing list. It is *not* a webboard. ruby-forum.com is a
*gateway* to the mailing list.
I think utter and blatant misconceptions such as these are good reason
to augment and/or adjust the "please read" blurb for ruby-forum.com ...
we apparently are not getting through. 
Perhaps something along the lines of: "This forum is a gateway to a
mailing list; it is NOT a forum on its own. All normal mailing list
etiquette and standards apply."
and/or: "When posting to the ruby-talk mailing list via this forum, you
should consider yourself a VISITOR in a foreign place. As such, please
acquaint yourself with some rules and standards of etiquette. <clickable
"
and/or: "Be forewarned that people have been seriously flamed for their
posts to ruby-talk via this forum. See [here] for what/how NOT to
post."
Pistos
···
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
Pistos Christou <jesusrubsyou.5.pistos@geoshell.com> writes:
That impression is probably at the root of your errors here. ruby-talk
is a mailing list. It is *not* a webboard. ruby-forum.com is a
*gateway* to the mailing list.
I think utter and blatant misconceptions such as these are good reason
to augment and/or adjust the "please read" blurb for ruby-forum.com ...
we apparently are not getting through.
To be honest I wonder if some cause for misunderstanding isn't
inherent in the name "ruby-forum" itself. Technically it is a neat
piece of hackery--it's rather impressive that it can maintain the
illusion that the mailing list is a forum. Socially there is a huge
divide, as we've seen.
Perhaps something along the lines of: "This forum is a gateway to a
mailing list; it is NOT a forum on its own. All normal mailing list
etiquette and standards apply."
I'm just thinking out loud here, but the fact that these repeated
explanations haven't gotten the point across makes me think that if
people see a web site titled "ruby-forum.com", the vast majority are
going to treat it like a forum. Perhaps if it was renamed to something
like "ruby-gateway.com" or the like we'd fare better.
-Phil Hagelberg
http://technomancy.us
Phil Hagelberg wrote:
To be honest I wonder if some cause for misunderstanding isn't
inherent in the name "ruby-forum" itself. Technically it is a neat
piece of hackery--it's rather impressive that it can maintain the
illusion that the mailing list is a forum. Socially there is a huge
divide, as we've seen.
I think that rather than it being a problem of warnings or naming, it is a problem of context. You behave a specific way when using a mailing list versus a web forum. If you're in the context of a web forum, it's going to be very difficult to behave in a mailing list fashion. Hence the unquoted, pithy, and sometimes rude emails we see here on ruby-talk that originated from the forum. I stay away from the forum because despite knowing that it's a gateway to a mailing list, I still have a very strong urge to use it like a forum. Context is a very powerful persuader.
The solution? Change the context of the website to look/feel more like a mailing list.
···
--
Tom Werner
Helmets to Hardhats
Software Developer
tom@helmetstohardhats.org
www.helmetstohardhats.org
Tom Werner wrote:
The solution? Change the context of the website to look/feel more like a
mailing list.
Hmm... fair enough, but how could Andreas approach this? One post per
page, with threads shown in tree form only?
At first glance, the only significant difference is the lack of or need
for sufficient quoting. Otherwise, "quality standards" [can] apply just
as equally to mailing lists as to forums, IMO.
Pistos
···
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
Pistos Christou wrote:
Tom Werner wrote:
The solution? Change the context of the website to look/feel more like a
mailing list.
Hmm... fair enough, but how could Andreas approach this? One post per page, with threads shown in tree form only?
Or replace the current page with one that has instructions on subscribing to ruby-talk.
I believe the intent behind ruby-forum.com was to offer something that *wasn't* like a mailing list. Which, in turn, brings non-list behavior.
···
--
James Britt
"I must create a system, or be enslaved by another man's;
I will not reason and compare; my business is to create."
- William Blake