[wlug_org] Rule suggestions [was Re: Does anyone else ...]

[Tony Wills]

At 11:54 14/08/2005, Jamie wrote:
>On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 16:30 -0700, Brent Wood wrote:
>"..What was wanted (pretty definitavely by the membership at the time)
>was an informal group of Linux & related software users. Full stop. (apart 
>from
>agreeing that Damon's guideline was a good idea, but only as a
>guideleine, nothing binding).."
>
> > Which I suggest is much less than it could or should be, but it is what the
> > group as a whole seems to want, ie:  no rules = open list.
>
>Is it worth reviewing that?
>...

If we need any rules, perhaps one would suffice -

If you are going to go off on a tangent or otherwise subvert a thread then 
change the subject line to something pertinent.
(That also implies that if you want to comment on the original subject and 
digress as well, that you post your digression as a separate post).
Digression includes complaints/comments/flames about the original posting 
style/spelling/grammar/relevance etc.

That way people can ask a question and expect to have that addressed 
without having to contend with a lot of noise and also know that having 
dipped into a thread and found it not to their taste that they can safely 
ignore the whole thing without missing anything ;-)

Hopefully the continuous forking would dissipate unwanted discussions and 
if it didn't, then a kill-file could be safely employed :-)

It retains an open list, allows a wide variety of discussions, and allows 
people to not get caught up in discussions not relevant to their interest.

Enforcement - all those interested send off-list emails pointing out the 
error (the intensity of the barrage proportional to the number of people 
who think you're off topic ;-) and refrain from posting on-list replies 
without amending the subject line (or be subjected to the same enforcement 
strategy :-)

Tony.