- From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 16:01:35 -0600
- To: "'Peter Pappamikail'" <ppappamikail@europarl.eu.int>, www-tag@w3.org
A mature moderator is best, IMO. It enables discretion and preserves the TAG's flexibility given that fixed rules don't have to be posted or followed in all situations all of the time. Given the fluidity of human communications in different contexts, human judgement will work better than fixed rules. Those who do not respond to moderation can be advised offline. Diplomacy. len -----Original Message----- From: Peter Pappamikail [mailto:ppappamikail@europarl.eu.int] Speaking as a lurker (if that ain't a contradiction): - I subscribed to the list to gain insight on W3C thinking on key architectural issues and I'm certainly getting more than I bargained for. I sympathise with Tim's point of view but is the main issue volume of messages rather than focus? Traffic is slow compared with xml-dev or others but each posting tends to merit more detailed attention. Certainly come up with a disciplined manner of labelling and following up postings and even give guidelines to non members as to what is acceptable as a post and what is not, but a great value is here in seeing the 'under the hood' thinking, 'stream of consciousness' style, that TAG members and others give particularly in response to queries from those outside the loop, like user communities (who are not represented in the TAG) If you restrict posting rights, at least discuss the criteria openly: It might help "us" focus comments also...and thus help you to help us
Received on Wednesday, 3 April 2002 17:02:07 UTC