[Zope-dev] mailing list 'noise'

[Toby Dickenson]

On Fri, 29 Sep 2000 10:23:52 +0200, Rik Hoekstra
<rik.hoekstra@inghist.nl> wrote:

>Karl Anderson wrote:
>> 
>> Ken Manheimer <klm@digicool.com> writes:
>> 
>> > > > I dont see this as a problem: You only create a new list when the
>> > > > traffic for that proposal gets too great for zope-dev. Threading is
>> > > > good enough before that point.
>> > >
>> > > Yes, but zope-dev has a relatively high traffic load... Why should you
>> > > have to put up with all that 'noise' if you're only interested in posts
>> > > for your comparatively small discussion?

>> I read the
>> 2-10 articles that I'm probably interested in, and miss the 95% which
>> is almost always noise.
>
>The question is why you'd want to receive all this if you don't have to
>(as remarked above).

...because it is usually a mistake to categorize any discussion as
small, to exclude it from the mainstream zope-dev. I started this
thread with a request that developers use zope-dev in the way
requested by the Fishbowl Process document - but (I assume) it has
also been valuable to people thinking about a next-generation wiki. 

That would not have happened if discussion was partitioned into Wikis
(Todays wikis - not VaporWikiNG) unless some WikiNgWiki person was (by
coincidence) keeping up with the FishbowlWiki.

Are you really advocating that?

>as long as you can follow it. But for prolonged and diverging
>discussions? Not quite IMO/Experience.

Can you explain why? 

>Or for discussions that you fall
>into in the middle?

Agreed - Todays Wikis are better than todays email list archives.

>And what if you want to follow discussions at
>different places, with different tools and you depend on a POP Server or
>differential access (POP/IMAP/Web) to a mailserver? 

Its true that the web model is increasingly becoming a lowest common
denominator. Are your suggesting that a majority of Zope developers
actually need that?

(Agreed, a VaporWikiNG that does both would be nice)

>As I understood it, the discussion is less about tools and more about
>modes of discussion.

But we couldnt be having this discussion (in any mode) without tools.

*My* email and news tools support the mode of discussion that we are
advocating *better* than *Todays* Wikis



Toby Dickenson
tdickenson@geminidataloggers.com