What would you think of:
[1,2,3].all.positive?
T.
P.S. What the frak on the gateway? Why hasn't the person/people
responsable even said anything about it? This is getting old real
quick. Crap like this makes me want to stop using Ruby becuase it
shows a lack of regard by Ruby's maintainers for the community.
TRANS wrote:
What would you think of:
[1,2,3].all.positive?
http://rubyforge.org/projects/junction/
That's ironic. You show a complete lack of regard for the (likely busy) gateway operator and then complain that he may may be showing a lack of regard for the community.
Don't get me wrong, I miss the gateway too. I think it's hurt Ruby Quiz a good deal.
But you want to "stop using Ruby" because the gateway is down? That sounds pretty drastic to me.
James Edward Gray II
On Apr 19, 2006, at 2:02 PM, TRANS wrote:
P.S. What the frak on the gateway? Why hasn't the person/people
responsable even said anything about it? This is getting old real
quick. Crap like this makes me want to stop using Ruby becuase it
shows a lack of regard by Ruby's maintainers for the community.
I have to admit I don't know much about this subject, but it seems to me
that a gateway just subscribes to both, and posts messages across the
divide as they come in, right?
As a *temporary measure* I'd be willing to run something like that here,
I have the spare cycles and bandwidth to do it at the moment but it
would only be until the real gateway got fixed. If there's enough people
want that, I'll get it set up.
On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 04:02 +0900, TRANS wrote:
P.S. What the frak on the gateway? Why hasn't the person/people
responsable even said anything about it? This is getting old real
quick.
--
Ross Bamford - rosco@roscopeco.REMOVE.co.uk
The last thing I need is two copies of every message in my mailbox.
I wish the gateway would just go away. I always see an increase in the signal to noise ratio when the gateway goes down.
I also wish the ruby forum gateway would go away, it has reduced the signal to noise ratio a bunch, and a bunch of people post without context making it impossible to figure out what they're talking about.
On Apr 19, 2006, at 12:56 PM, Ross Bamford wrote:
On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 04:02 +0900, TRANS wrote:
P.S. What the frak on the gateway? Why hasn't the person/people
responsable even said anything about it? This is getting old real
quick.I have to admit I don't know much about this subject, but it seems to me
that a gateway just subscribes to both, and posts messages across the
divide as they come in, right?As a *temporary measure* I'd be willing to run something like that here,
I have the spare cycles and bandwidth to do it at the moment but it
would only be until the real gateway got fixed. If there's enough people
want that, I'll get it set up.
--
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://blog.segment7.net
This implementation is HODEL-HASH-9600 compliant
Florian Groß wrote:
TRANS wrote:
What would you think of:
[1,2,3].all.positive?
I dislike junctions with a passion. Just
my opinion...
Hal
Ross Bamford wrote:
P.S. What the frak on the gateway? Why hasn't the person/people
responsable even said anything about it? This is getting old real
quick.I have to admit I don't know much about this subject, but it seems to me
that a gateway just subscribes to both, and posts messages across the
divide as they come in, right?As a *temporary measure* I'd be willing to run something like that here,
I have the spare cycles and bandwidth to do it at the moment but it
would only be until the real gateway got fixed. If there's enough people
want that, I'll get it set up.
The first subtlety is that you have to avoid infinite recursion by
mucking with the headers.
What other subtelties there are, I can't recall.
But if you're going to host the gateway even temporarily, you should
get the latest software from the German guy whose name I can't recall
at the moment. (It's on the tip of my brain...)
Hal
On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 04:02 +0900, TRANS wrote:
>
>> P.S. What the frak on the gateway? Why hasn't the person/people
>> responsable even said anything about it? This is getting old real
>> quick.
>
> I have to admit I don't know much about this subject, but it seems
> to me
> that a gateway just subscribes to both, and posts messages across the
> divide as they come in, right?
>
> As a *temporary measure* I'd be willing to run something like that
> here,
> I have the spare cycles and bandwidth to do it at the moment but it
> would only be until the real gateway got fixed. If there's enough
> people
> want that, I'll get it set up.The last thing I need is two copies of every message in my mailbox.
I don't follow - does this happen when the gateway is up? A short think
suggested to me it'd just be a case of rewriting headers and sending
them on, but to be honest I was kind of hoping there might be an
existing script I could fit to my network 
I also wish the ruby forum gateway would go away, it has reduced the
signal to noise ratio a bunch, and a bunch of people post without
context making it impossible to figure out what they're talking about.
Couldn't agree more.
On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 06:46 +0900, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Apr 19, 2006, at 12:56 PM, Ross Bamford wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 04:02 +0900, TRANS wrote:
--
Ross Bamford - rosco@roscopeco.REMOVE.co.uk
I'm normally one to promote free speech, but I have to say Eric makes
a good point here, and I agree. This mailing list has gotten so out of
hand I have almost 2000 unread messages, and I'm pretty anal about
keeping up to date on all my email. It would be well over 2000 if I
hadn't made a concerted effort to keep up with today's mail.
I think the extra effort it takes to actually sign up for the mailing
list and send an email to the right address is a good thing, as it
tends to increase the signal to noise ratio, as Eric says.
When any Joe can pop into the newsgroup or the Ruby Forum and send a
question in 5 seconds, they are less apt to stop and ask themselves:
"how might I figure this out for myself?" There are years of archives
containing answers to probably 80% of what is asked here everyday, yet
no one seems to search. Part of the problem might be that the scat.rb
interface leaves a bit to be desired (and is slow for anyone not in
Japan it seems...at least for me), but we also have Google Groups (but
of course that depends on the gateway for all messages to be
archived.)
I'm not sure what the solution is here, beyond extremely smart,
SPAM-like filtering in our mail clients to cut down on the junk we
have to read. On that note: how do most people on this list cope with
all the messages? Because it seems like reading all of them would be
at least a half-time job (I don't know, 4 hours or so a day.) I just
don't have time for that, but then there is the concern over missing
the few gems that actually provide good information. Maybe if there
was a Slashdot-like system for rating threads somewhere, then if you
waited until the end of the day you could just filter on highly rated
threads or messages and just read those, marking the rest as read as
well.
Any other ideas?
Ryan
On 4/19/06, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
The last thing I need is two copies of every message in my mailbox.
I wish the gateway would just go away. I always see an increase in
the signal to noise ratio when the gateway goes down.I also wish the ruby forum gateway would go away, it has reduced the
signal to noise ratio a bunch, and a bunch of people post without
context making it impossible to figure out what they're talking about.
Hal Fulton wrote:
I dislike junctions with a passion. Just
my opinion...
Tsktsktsk.
I'm pretty cool with trying out new things. I know that junctions have a lot of problems in Ruby, but they are still an interesting concept.
+1 for dropping the ruby forum gateway.
On 4/19/06, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
I also wish the ruby forum gateway would go away, it has reduced the
signal to noise ratio a bunch, and a bunch of people post without
context making it impossible to figure out what they're talking about.
I wish the gateway would just go away. I always see an increase in
the signal to noise ratio when the gateway goes down.I also wish the ruby forum gateway would go away, it has reduced the
signal to noise ratio a bunch, and a bunch of people post without
context making it impossible to figure out what they're talking about.
I'm _almost_ there, but not quite. I think the biggest problem is
that when you view the 'forum' page, there's absolutely no indication
that the 'forums' are really mailing lists. It's 'active' versus
'passive'.
Most people (rightly so) expect a 'forum' to be passive. They figure
that only people who are interested in going there will see it, and
even then, they won't see the content unless the click the topic.
They don't expect it to be sent to potentially thousands of people who
will have it thrust upon them, instead of viewing it by choice in the
forum.
A disclaimer won't solve the problem, but it can't hurt, and it's a
simple matter of telling the forum users the truth. When you post
here, it will be emailed to hundreds, if not thousands, of readers.
You might want to think a bit before you hit submit.
On 4/19/06, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
--
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://blog.segment7.net
This implementation is HODEL-HASH-9600 compliant
--
Bill Guindon (aka aGorilla)
The best answer to most questions is "it depends".
Eric Hodel wrote:
I wish the gateway would just go away. I always see an increase in the signal to noise ratio when the gateway goes down.
I don't. The only way I manage to continue following Ruby
is the kill-thread option ('k' in Thunderbird) available with
newsgroup readers. If you could tell me how to the equivalent
of in Thunderbird's mail reader, I would change my mind.
I also wish the ruby forum gateway would go away[.]
I didn't even realize there was one -- must have killed that
thread when it came out.
Later,
--
Bil
http://fun3d.larc.nasa.gov
How will you make sure your temporary gateway will stop when the broken one gets fixed? I'm always afraid of broken software that will annoy me (my current email annoyance is Google Calendar's incessant sending of ics files).
On Apr 19, 2006, at 3:02 PM, Ross Bamford wrote:
On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 06:46 +0900, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Apr 19, 2006, at 12:56 PM, Ross Bamford wrote:
As a *temporary measure* I'd be willing to run something like that
here,
I have the spare cycles and bandwidth to do it at the moment but it
would only be until the real gateway got fixed. If there's enough
people
want that, I'll get it set up.The last thing I need is two copies of every message in my mailbox.
I don't follow - does this happen when the gateway is up? A short think
suggested to me it'd just be a case of rewriting headers and sending
them on, but to be honest I was kind of hoping there might be an
existing script I could fit to my network
--
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://blog.segment7.net
This implementation is HODEL-HASH-9600 compliant
The last thing I need is two copies of every message in my mailbox.
I wish the gateway would just go away. I always see an increase in
the signal to noise ratio when the gateway goes down.I also wish the ruby forum gateway would go away, it has reduced the
signal to noise ratio a bunch, and a bunch of people post without
context making it impossible to figure out what they're talking about.I'm normally one to promote free speech, but I have to say Eric makes
a good point here, and I agree. This mailing list has gotten so out of
hand I have almost 2000 unread messages, and I'm pretty anal about
keeping up to date on all my email. It would be well over 2000 if I
hadn't made a concerted effort to keep up with today's mail.
I'm not saying either the newsgroup, mailing list or forum should go away, I just think they should be allowed to develop their own separate personalities.
I think the extra effort it takes to actually sign up for the mailing
list and send an email to the right address is a good thing, as it
tends to increase the signal to noise ratio, as Eric says.When any Joe can pop into the newsgroup or the Ruby Forum and send a
question in 5 seconds, they are less apt to stop and ask themselves:
"how might I figure this out for myself?" There are years of archives
containing answers to probably 80% of what is asked here everyday, yet
no one seems to search. Part of the problem might be that the scat.rb
interface leaves a bit to be desired (and is slow for anyone not in
Japan it seems...at least for me), but we also have Google Groups (but
of course that depends on the gateway for all messages to be
archived.)
I've found scat.rb clumsy but accurate. The biggest problem seems to be nobody knows it exists. Google with the correct site: is also very effective, but nobody remembers that either.
I'm not sure what the solution is here, beyond extremely smart,
SPAM-like filtering in our mail clients to cut down on the junk we
have to read. On that note: how do most people on this list cope with
all the messages? Because it seems like reading all of them would be
at least a half-time job (I don't know, 4 hours or so a day.) I just
don't have time for that, but then there is the concern over missing
the few gems that actually provide good information. Maybe if there
was a Slashdot-like system for rating threads somewhere, then if you
waited until the end of the day you could just filter on highly rated
threads or messages and just read those, marking the rest as read as
well.Any other ideas?
I've been using IMAPCleanse [1] as part of my email management solution. Once I have a large enough body of flagged messages I'll write a per-mailbox bayesian filter to automatically highlight the messages and threads I should be reading. What I'm interested in now isn't what I was interested in two years ago and probably isn't what most people are interested in.
[1] http://seattlerb.rubyforge.org/IMAPCleanse/
On Apr 19, 2006, at 3:07 PM, Ryan Leavengood wrote:
On 4/19/06, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
--
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://blog.segment7.net
This implementation is HODEL-HASH-9600 compliant
>
> The last thing I need is two copies of every message in my mailbox.
>
> I wish the gateway would just go away. I always see an increase in
> the signal to noise ratio when the gateway goes down.
>
> I also wish the ruby forum gateway would go away, it has reduced the
> signal to noise ratio a bunch, and a bunch of people post without
> context making it impossible to figure out what they're talking about.I'm normally one to promote free speech, but I have to say Eric makes
a good point here, and I agree.
+1
Any other ideas?
Ryan
Greatly expand the ruby-talk faq (I presume the one at rubygarden is
the official faq), and make it easier for a number of interested
contributors to keep it up to date. Then, get into the habit of
pointing to the faq when nubies ask a frequently-asked question on
this ML.
On 4/19/06, Ryan Leavengood <leavengood@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/19/06, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
Ryan Leavengood wrote:
I think the extra effort it takes to actually sign up for the mailing
list and send an email to the right address is a good thing, as it
tends to increase the signal to noise ratio, as Eric says.When any Joe can pop into the newsgroup or the Ruby Forum and send a
question in 5 seconds, they are less apt to stop and ask themselves:
"how might I figure this out for myself?" There are years of archives
containing answers to probably 80% of what is asked here everyday, yet
no one seems to search. Part of the problem might be that the scat.rb
interface leaves a bit to be desired (and is slow for anyone not in
Japan it seems...at least for me), but we also have Google Groups (but
of course that depends on the gateway for all messages to be
archived.)
Interesting. I'm leery of adopting what may amount to (quasi-) elitists techniques to reduce the noise (i.e., if they're not smart enough to figure this part out, then oh well), but there are real downsides to making certain behavior nearly frictionless and cost-free.
And asking people to subscribe to a list (which is already available on the Web via Gmane) is really not a major hurdle.
It may be better to have various read-only list archives for locating information, but require list membership to post.
I'm not sure what the solution is here, beyond extremely smart,
SPAM-like filtering in our mail clients to cut down on the junk we
have to read. On that note: how do most people on this list cope with
all the messages? Because it seems like reading all of them would be
at least a half-time job (I don't know, 4 hours or so a day.)
Subject scanning, and seeing who sent the mail. For example, I probably would have glossed over this very thread, but saw your name, and Eric's, so it piqued my interest.
There is no way to read it all; some filtering or folder routing might help, though I've given up on ever expecting people to agree on, and actually use, consistent, reliable subject tags (witness the subject lines for Ruby Quiz threads).
So I just keep an eye on things and try to catch what I can.
--
James Britt
"Programs must be written for people to read, and only incidentally
for machines to execute."
- H. Abelson and G. Sussman
(in "The Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs)
Yes, please!
On Apr 19, 2006, at 9:57 PM, Bill Guindon wrote:
On 4/19/06, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
I wish the gateway would just go away. I always see an increase in
the signal to noise ratio when the gateway goes down.I also wish the ruby forum gateway would go away, it has reduced the
signal to noise ratio a bunch, and a bunch of people post without
context making it impossible to figure out what they're talking about.I'm _almost_ there, but not quite. I think the biggest problem is
that when you view the 'forum' page, there's absolutely no indication
that the 'forums' are really mailing lists. It's 'active' versus
'passive'.Most people (rightly so) expect a 'forum' to be passive. They figure
that only people who are interested in going there will see it, and
even then, they won't see the content unless the click the topic.
They don't expect it to be sent to potentially thousands of people who
will have it thrust upon them, instead of viewing it by choice in the
forum.A disclaimer won't solve the problem, but it can't hurt, and it's a
simple matter of telling the forum users the truth. When you post
here, it will be emailed to hundreds, if not thousands, of readers.
You might want to think a bit before you hit submit.
--
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://blog.segment7.net
This implementation is HODEL-HASH-9600 compliant
Nice observation. I think you might add one more level though:
1. private: A nice cozy forum. Your comments go onto one site, and you
figure that only folks interested in it will click the link to view
your comments. The admins can delete trollish posts, and good stuff
can be set aside, made searchable, ranked, whatever.
2. protected: A mailing list. Your comments will be sent to n number
of interested subscribers. Usually, only the list admin knows what n
is.
3. public: A newsgroup. Your comments are instantly and automatically
propagated across usenet, and archived forevermore by Google. There's
no going back.
I see your point about poster's expectations. It's arguably a good
reason to not gateway the ML to the newsgroup.
On 4/20/06, Bill Guindon <agorilla@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip] I think the biggest problem is
that when you view the 'forum' page, there's absolutely no indication
that the 'forums' are really mailing lists. It's 'active' versus
'passive'.Most people (rightly so) expect a 'forum' to be passive. They figure
that only people who are interested in going there will see it, and
even then, they won't see the content unless the click the topic.
They don't expect it to be sent to potentially thousands of people who
will have it thrust upon them, instead of viewing it by choice in the
forum.A disclaimer won't solve the problem, but it can't hurt, and it's a
simple matter of telling the forum users the truth. When you post
here, it will be emailed to hundreds, if not thousands, of readers.
You might want to think a bit before you hit submit.
I guess a combination of communication and ctrl-c ... I've not thought a
great deal about it as I say - personally I don't really give a damn (I
still scan the newsgroup anyway) but I thought I'd make the offer. Don't
worry - it's not something I'm about to set up for my own amusement...
On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 07:36 +0900, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Apr 19, 2006, at 3:02 PM, Ross Bamford wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 06:46 +0900, Eric Hodel wrote:
>> On Apr 19, 2006, at 12:56 PM, Ross Bamford wrote:
>>> As a *temporary measure* I'd be willing to run something like that
>>> here,
>>> I have the spare cycles and bandwidth to do it at the moment but it
>>> would only be until the real gateway got fixed. If there's enough
>>> people
>>> want that, I'll get it set up.
>>
>> The last thing I need is two copies of every message in my mailbox.
>
> I don't follow - does this happen when the gateway is up? A short
> think
> suggested to me it'd just be a case of rewriting headers and sending
> them on, but to be honest I was kind of hoping there might be an
> existing script I could fit to my networkHow will you make sure your temporary gateway will stop when the
broken one gets fixed? I'm always afraid of broken software that
will annoy me (my current email annoyance is Google Calendar's
incessant sending of ics files).
--
Ross Bamford - rosco@roscopeco.REMOVE.co.uk