[TYPES] stricter moderation...?
Geoffrey Alan Washburn
geoffw at cis.upenn.edu
Thu Dec 22 14:56:32 EST 2005
Benjamin Pierce wrote:
> I am also very much in favor of a slightly stricter moderation
> policy, though I'm aware that it may be difficult to find a policy
> that is both desirable and implementable with a reasonable amount of
> Stephanie's energy. I liked the old policy that Phil describes, but
> I think it got left by the wayside when we transitioned to the
> Mailman software from the older ad hoc system: AFAIK, Mailman doesn't
> provide an easy way for the moderator to send a message back to a
> poster saying "I'm rejecting your post but I'd be happy to accept one
> with a preamble explaining its relevance to the list."
"Use the source Luke" :-) http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/
> One piece of anecdotal evidence that more moderation would be better
> (for me) is that I discovered a few months ago that, when messages
> arrives via Types, my instinctive reaction was annoyance rather than
> interest ("Oh, here's more spam..."). Since then I've been sending
> Types stuff to a separate mailbox that I look at only rarely. This
> seems a shame.
I would have to agree a great majority of the mail I get from TYPES
these days is filed without being read. I just did a quick analysis of
approximately the last month's messages (before this thread started) and
found that there were 38 messages total. Nine of the messages were not
announcements -- all discussion on the semantics of intersection types.
Of the remaining 29 messages, which were various sorts of announcements,
9 mentioned the word "type" in a way other than the header mailman adds
to messages. The remaining 20 messages did not mention the word "type",
though a few did mention other keywords that might have made them
eligible in a more comprehensive study.
> Cutting down on the number of random announcements might also help
> people feel encouraged to post questions and start discussions (to
> keep the volume from going too low :-).
Indeed. I would agree with Eijiro that the signal is too low at the
[Geoff Washburn|geoffw at cis.upenn.edu|http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~geoffw/]
More information about the Types-list