W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 2005

Re: Obsession v. "failure to be understood"

From: Wingnut <wingnut@winternet.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 11:06:01 -0600
Message-ID: <438895F9.7040709@winternet.com>
To: www-style@w3.org

Philip TAYLOR wrote:
> 
>  From time to time, discussion on this list gets taken
> over by a single thread, usually with one proponent
> and many who wish to argue against.  Whilst one can
> understand that a particularly complex idea may require
> more than one iteration before it can be fully understood,
> not all proposals fall into that category, and I therefore
> suggest that there needs to be a mechanism whereby this
> list can be sub-classed for a finite duration so that
> those wishing to explore a single proposal /ad nauseam/
> may do so without monopolising the entire bandwidth of
> the full list.  What do others think ?
> 
> Philip Taylor
> 
> 

Hi Phil!  Thanks for your comments!  Some gestapoids will complain about 
this not being on-subject.... because its about POSTING and not about 
web tech. I'll kick 'em in the head if they make a noise, ok?  We can 
talk on this subject all we want, right?  :)

If ya think about it, this maillist is already quite filterable via a 
metadata called "subject".  The "entire bandwidth" is not being 
"monopolised"... just certain subject threads.  One can easily use a 
mail client to block the subjects that one isn't interested in seeing 
the bandwidth usage-of.  This is the same way "fault tree software" 
works.... like that used to investigate the shuttle accidents.  Anyone 
can enter a "node" or a "point of spawn".  From THAT point, an ANY-sized 
discussion "branch" can happen... but it always tries to stay in 2-3 
subjects beneath a base subject... so its not in the way of other 
subjects whatsoever... unless you LET it be... via crappy mailreader. 
Early in a subject's life, a mailreader can be told to "pipe this 
subject into a folder" automatically, and then its REALLY easy to avoid 
seeing disliked bandwidth usage.  Yet, you're able to go read the 
subject later if you want... because its all in the folder, hidden from 
your view, but available and organized.  Even if you just TRASH CAN the 
subject as it comes in the door... you can always go to the web 
interface and see it organized by subject...

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2005Nov/subject.html

Its not so difficult to avoid/select the unwanted/wanted "subject 
branches" there, right?  We have to ENCOURAGE talking in these lists, 
not discourage it with "its too noisy" complaints.  Not being heard by 
the W3C... is a quick way to make an idea person... not offer any more 
ideas.  Ask Ted Nelson.  There's not JUST obsession and "failing to be 
understood"... there's also failure for listeners/w3c-wigs to be smart 
enough to comprehend, and failure for listeners/w3c-wigs to be open 
minded enough to consider sometimes-drastic change ideas.  Many run into 
"its done, its working, so lets leave it alone"... which essentially 
"freezes" future ideas.  Its already been seen in the W3C... NUMEROUS 
NUMEROUS times.  Its also seen in "wizards" (sysops) of bbs's, muds, 
mushes, and moo's... as admin gets power-trippy over their kingdom.

I DO think maybe "subject starters" should have editability of their own 
posts WITHIN that subject... and maybe some other light admin power... 
much like the wonderful XulPlanet forums.  But, this is a mailist, not a 
web blog... so that might be rough due to that.

*shrug*
I feel your pain, Phil... but I have a feeling its self-inflicted due to 
you not having good tools to subject-wrangle maillists-with.

Party on!
Wingnut
Minneapolis
Received on Saturday, 26 November 2005 17:08:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:41 GMT