Tim: >> nunoauboulot's response was actually quite polite, and only asked two >> questions. If someone had done the same to me in public while I was >> discussing something, I'd probably be a bit more forthright in wondering >> why they were interrupting with something completely irrelevant, and >> asking if they didn't have any manners. >> >> The attitude that everyone should make no fuss, at all, about anyone >> making a pest of themselves leads to the eventual outcome that no-one >> gives a shit. It becomes a free for all, where the only thing that >> actually gets criticised are those who dare to point out that you did >> the wrong thing. To paraphrase someone else, anyone who behaves like >> that deserves the society that they'll eventually get. David-Paul Niner: > (I wasn't going to bother replying again, but I just couldn't resist!) I have to wonder why you replied in the first place. The original poster said two things, and quite appropriate they were, too. But you had to pipe in and complain that they dared to comment about someone hijacking their post. How dare they! The nerve of the person! It's rude enough to change a conversation, but it's obviously inexcusable to bring anybody's attention to the fact. What would have happened if you kept your mouth shut? Probably nothing more than the original poster's question about "why?". But, no, you wanted to make an argument, and now that you've got one, you're complaining about it. And on very stupid grounds, too. That's the sort of thing, your "don't make complaints" attitude, that makes things uninviting. OP posts about something. Interloper buggers up the thread. OP, very appropriately, asks "why". You jump in and wrongly proclaim that the OP should't have done so. I make a comment supporting their point. You're now vehemently arguing the case for the person who stuffed things up. Versus: OP posts about something. Interloper buggers up the thread. OP asks "why". Interloper learns, or shuts up, and things carry on working. > So your assertion is that the downfall of our society will be > predecessed by someone making a mistake posting to a mailing list: No, you're reading too much into things. The downfall of society is not giving a damn about anything. The downfall of a list is members not giving a damn. The attitude of people like you, in one arena, is an indication of why that sort of thing becomes a problem everywhere. This mailing list is a "society" in itself. If you're going to argue that it should be a free-for-all, as you are, then you're going to find it next to useless for yourself, never mind everyone else, in short order. Let the spammers come in, as you you don't seem to mind what anybody does, so long as nobody complains about it. > "It becomes a free for all, where the only thing that actually gets > criticised[sic] are those who dare to point out that you did > the wrong thing. To paraphrase someone else, anyone who behaves like > that deserves the society that they'll eventually get." > > Please...either get a grip or get out of the basement every now and > then! > > My original point was absolutely correct: That sort of treatment will > drive away new, inexperienced users. Of course if your intent is to > keep this group a "private key club" then you're well on you're way. Your original point was being an apologist for someone mucking up a mailing list. Did you not read what they said? Did you somehow think someone asking two pertinent questions was an invitation to jump down their throat? Which you did, but oddly enough seem to think it was alright for you to do that. >From time to time it is *neccessary* to point out when someone stuffs things up, else it all goes downhill. Doing so *occasionally* does the trick. It isn't neccessary to do it everytime, and you'll notice that doesn't happen. I've no interest in doing this more than the odd occasion, and I'm sure one or two others feel the same way (they'll make an occasional comment when things go awry). I, and probably many others, are on *many* mailing lists, and read through *hundreds* of messages a day. If nobody ever made any comment about not hijacking threads, not posting HTML, not saying anything useful in subject lines, quoting messes of prior postings, and all the other things that make a mailing list work badly, newcomers would not know how to participate. Newcomers would all come in and keep on messing things up worse and worse until it becomes unmanagable. Newcomers would come in and bury a query in the middle of somewhere it doesn't get seen, then bitch that they don't get any help. At some stage, someone has to point out that their messages, done like that, will get instantly deleted/ignored by those most likely to have an answer. You face three choices: Nobody does anything, and it becomes a right mess. Members occasionally point things out, and things carry on. List managers have to get heavy handed because of lack of the first two. Are you actually so cloth-headed to argue that it's not a problem to hijack a thread? Are you so pigheaded that you find it objectionable that a poster asks *why* someone romped in and subverted their thread? (Yes, I know that's ironic, now, but the damage has been done.) And to be honest, if one or two people come in, mess up, and go away, that's their problem. Hopefully, they learn and participate. If they're not prepared to do that, why bother. It's not about being a "private" club, it's about being useable. Perhaps you'd like every message to be 60k of HTML instead of 1k of plain text. Perhaps you'd like every message to have no coherent subject line. Perhaps at some point you'll feel the need to point out it's a problem, but you've made it clear that to do so is obviously wrong. Would you wait until the point where it was 10:1 spam:postings? -- (Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.) Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists.
